B 
R 

T 


BX  5198    .R68  1916 
Rowden,  Aldred  William.  184 
-1919. 

The  primates  of  the  four 
GejQr_aes 


THE  PRIMATES  OF  THE 
FOUR  GEORGES 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arcliive 
in  2015 


littps://arcliive.org/details/primatesoffourgeOOrowd 


Wii, 1,1AM  Wake 


\Frontispiece 


THE  PRIMATES  OF 
THE  FOUR  GEORGES 


By  ALDRED  VV.  ROWDEN,  K.C. 


WITH  PORTRAITS 


NEW  YORK 
E.  P.   BUTTON  AND  COMPANY 
1916 


/ 


I 


PREFACE 


The  writer  desires  to  thank  the  Dean  of  Christ  Church, 
Oxford,  for  giving  him  access  to  the  Wake  MSS  at 
Christ  Church.  He  wishes  also  to  acknowledge  the 
kindness  shown  him  by  the  Librarian  at  Christ  Church, 
and  the  under- Librarian,  Mr.  Francis,  during  his 
researches  in  the  Library  at  Christ  Church. 

The  extracts  from  the  Wake  MSS  are  pubhshed  with 
the  permission  of  the  Trustees  of  the  MSS,  the  Dean  of 
Christ  Church,  and  the  Regius  Professors  of  Divinity 
and  Hebrew,  Oxford,  for  which  permission  the  writer  is 
deeply  grateful. 

He  has  also  to  thank  the  Rev.  Claude  Jenkins, 
Librarian  at  Lambeth,  for  much  courteous  assistance. 

To  His  Grace  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  the 
writer's  sincere  thanks  are  due  for  permission  to  copy 
the  portraits  at  Lambeth  which  appear  as  illustrations 
of  this  volume. 

A.  W.  R. 


INTRODUCTORY  STATEMENT 


Queen  Anne  died  on  ist  August  1714.  Archbishop 
Tenison  had  then  been  Primate  for  twenty  years, 
having  been  appointed  in  1694  by  WilHam  iii.  On  the 
i6th  September,  George  i.  landed  at  Greenwich,  and  on 
the  20th  October  he  was  crowned  in  Westminster  Abbey 
by  the  Venerable  Tenison.  The  Primate  survived  the 
ceremony  less  than  two  months,  his  death  taking  place 
on  Christmas  Eve  following.  William  Wake,  who  suc- 
ceeded him,  may  therefore  be  fairly  described  as  the 
first  Georgian  Primate. 


vi 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

William  Wake  (1716-1737)  .          .          .          .          .  i 

John  Potter  (i 737-1 747)    •          •          •          •          •  ''^^5 

Thomas  Herring  (1747-1757)        ....  167 

Matthew  Hutton  (1757-1758)       ....  230 

Thomas  Secker  (1758-1768)          ....  248 

Frederick  Cornwallis  (i 768-1 783)          .          .          .  310 

John  Moore  (i 783-1805)     .....  348 

Charles  Manners  Sutton  (1805-1828)     .          .          .  380 

Index  ........  427 


ix 


LIST  OF  PORTRAITS 


William  Wake         .....  Frontispiece 

FACING  PAGE 

John  Potter  .......  142 

Thomas  Herring      .  .  .  .  .  .214 

Matthew  Hutton    ......  246 

Thomas  Secker        ......  278 

Frederick  Cornwallis       .....  326 

John  Moore  .......  374 

Charles  Manners  Sutton  .....  406 


THE  PRIMATES  OF  THE 
FOUR  GEORGES 

WILLIAM  WAKE 
1716-1737 

William  Wake  was  born  on  the  26th  January  1657, 
Blandford  in  Dorset,  being  the  son  of  Mr.  WilUam  Wake 
of  Shipwick  in  that  town,  a  man  of  good  family  and 
comfortable  fortune.  The  archbishop  in  later  life 
showed  himself  not  uninterested  in  his  ancestors  and 
pedigree,  and  wrote  a  brief  inquiry  into  thft  "  antiquity, 
honour,  and  estate  "  of  the  name  of  the  family  of  Wake 
for  the  use  of  his  son,  which  was  reprinted  at  War- 
minster in  1833  by  his  great-granddaughter,  Etheldreda 
Bennett.  The  archbishop's  pride  in  the  antiquity  of 
his  family  and  the  distinction  of  his  early  ancestors 
was  by  no  means  without  foundation.  The  family  of 
Wake  or  le  Wake  goes  back  to  the  Norman  Conquest  or 
before  it.  The  name  of  Wake  or  Wac  is  in  the  roll  of 
Battle  Abbey.  Brompton  says  that  some  of  the  family 
were  of  those  who  asked  William  the  Conqueror  to 
come  over.  But  a  better  story  is  that  Herewold,  sur- 
named  de  Wake  or  Le  Wake,  was  the  last  of  the  Barons 
to  submit  to  William  i.,  who  came  to  terms  with  him 
in  1076,  the  terms  involving  Wake's  restoration  to  his 
estates  and  honours.  The  Lordships  of  Brunne  and 
Depyng  continued  in  the  family  for  over  500  years. 
A  Chronicler  of  Primates  should  not  omit  to  mention 
that  in  our  own  time  a  member  of  the  Wake  family 
has  been  brought  into  close  connexion  with  Canterbury, 


3 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


an  elder  and  very  dear  sister  of  Archbishop  Tait  having 
married  Sir  Charles  Wake.  From  Herewold  was 
descended  Baldwin  le  Wake,  who  was  a  baron  at  the 
coronation  of  Richard  i.  Indeed  our  archbishop 
claimed,  and  not  without  reason,  royal  affinity. 
Baldwin's  grandson,  Thomas,  married  Blanche  Planta- 
genet,  and  on  his  death  without  issue  the  estates 
passed  to  his  sister,  wife  of  Edmund  of  Woodstocl^, 
Edward  the  First's  youngest  son,  whose  daughter  was 
Joan,  "  a  lady  of  transcendent  beauty,"  and  known  as 
the  Fair  Maid  of  Kent.  She  had  for  her  third  husband 
the  Black  Prince,  and  they  were  the  father  and  mother 
of  Richard  11. 

Archbishop  Wake's  own  paternal  grandmother  was 
Elizabeth  Gorges,  daughter  of  Sir  Edward  Gorges, 
Knight. 

William  Wake,  the  subject  of  our  memoir,  received 
his  education  at  Blandford  Grammar  School,  under 
Curgenwen.  His  progress  and  success  at  school  were 
remarkable,  and  his  father  resolved  on  his  going  to  the 
University.  He  accordingly  took  him  to  Oxford  with 
the  intention  of  entering  him  at  Trinity.  But  father 
and  son,  in  making  a  tour  of  inspection  of  the  Uni- 
versity cit}-,  happened  to  fall  in  with  Fell — the  Dean  of 
Christ  Church,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Oxford — who  knew 
something  of  the  elder  Wake.  Father  and  son  were 
invited  to  partake  of  the  Dean's  hospitality,  and,  as  a 
result  of  a  promise  by  the  Dean  to  give  the  young  man 
a  student's  place,  Trinity  was  given  up,  and  the  future 
archbishop  was  admitted  a  student  of  Christ  Church, 
and  matriculated  on  28th  February  1672,  being  then 
fifteen  years  old. 

Wake  took  his  degree  of  B.A.  on  26th  October  1676, 
and  two  and  a  half  years  later,  viz.,  on  29th  June  1679, 
proceeded  to  take  the  degree  of  M.A.  His  father  is  said 
to  have  designed  him  for  trade,  and  to  have  laid  out  no 
less  a  sum  than  £10,000  to  put  him  into  the  clothing 
business  :  but  the  future  archbishop  throughout  his  life 


1737] 


VISIT  TO  PARIS 


3 


was  of  genuine  piety,  and  was  resolved,  in  spite  of 
paternal  schemes  for  worldly  riches,  to  take  orders. 

Shortly  afterwards  he  had  the  opportunity  of  being 
introduced  to  a  foreign  Court  under  favourable  circum- 
stances. In  1682,  Charles  11.  sent  Sir  Richard  Graham, 
who  had  sat  in  Parliament  as  burgess  for  Cockermouth 
in  Cumberland,  to  Paris  as  his  envoy  extraordinary  to 
the  Court  of  Louis  xiv.,  having  previously  raised  him  to 
the  peerage  of  Scotland  as  Lord  Viscount  Preston. 
The  Envoy  to  Paris  had  himself  been  educated  at 
Christ  Church,  and  requiring  the  services  of  a  chaplain 
gave  the  post  to  his  Christ  Church  friend.  Lord  Preston 
was  a  man  of  learning,  and  much  later,  being  a  great 
friend  and  favourite  of  James  11.,  was  made  by  him  in 
1688, when  times  were  getting  desperate  for  that  monarch, 
Secretary  of  State  in  place  of  Sunderland.  In  1690 
he  got  mixed  up  with  Henry  Lord  Clarendon,  Turner, 
Bishop  of  Ely,  Ken's  friend,  Ashton,  and  Graham  in  a 
Jacobite  plot.  How  the  conspirators  fared  may  be 
told  in  Evelyn's  language  under  date  18th  January 
1691  :  "  Lord  Preston  "  (being  only  a  Scotch  peer  he 
was  tried  at  the  Old  Bailey)  "  condemned  about  a 
design  to  bring  in  King  James  by  the  French.  Ashton 
executed.  The  Bishop  of  Ely,  Mr.  Graham,  etc., 
absconded."  Turner  had  been  one  of  James  11. 's 
chaplains  when  the  latter  was  Duke  of  York,  and  could 
not  give  up  his  loyalty  to  him.  His  prominent  nose, 
"  Turner's  beak  or  hook  " — known  to  those  acquainted 
with  his  picture  in  the  Hall  of  New  College,  Oxford — 
made  him,  as  Archbishop  Sancroft  said  in  a  letter  a 
year  or  so  later,  "  a  very  remarkable  person,"  who  could 
not  rely  for  escape  in  any  disguise  :  "  not  of  late  only, 
but  of  old,  Sancroft  quaintly  remarks,  the  Tapocffyjfjijov  of 
the  vessel  the  sign  by  which  'twas  known  was  in  the 
Prow  or  Beak,  Acts  xxviii."  Ashton  played  the 
man  on  the  scaffold,  but  Preston  purchased  his  life  by 
disclosures  far  from  creditable.  But  the  real  security 
of  the  plotters  lay  in  William  iii.'s  undoubted  mag- 


4 


WILLIAM  WAKE  [1716- 


nanimity.  It  was  when  Preston  was  being  examined 
in  William's  presence  and  was  implicating  public  men, 
Whigs  as  well  as  Tories,  right  and  left,  and  Carmarthen, 
the  Danby  of  former  years,  was  egging  him  on  to  further 
and  further  disclosures,  that  the  King  touched  Car- 
marthen upon  the  shoulder  saying,  "  My  Lord,  there  is 
too  much  of  this." 

To  return,  however,  it  is  certainly  to  Preston's 
credit  that  he  should  have  selected  as  a  companion  of 
his  foreign  residence  a  man  of  the  learning  and  piety  of 
Wake. 

Wake's  time  in  Paris  was  spent  in  a  way  befitting 
his  character  and  habits.  Bishop  Fell  of  Oxford,  his 
old  friend  of  Christ  Church  days,  was  at  the  time  pre- 
paring an  edition  of  the  New  Testament  in  Greek,  and 
through  Lord  Preston  got  Wake  to  collate  an  important 
New  Testament  manuscript  The  English  Prelate 
had  chosen  the  right  man  for  the  job,  as  appears  from 
Wake's  letter  to  him  dated  the  3rd  July  1684  in  or  near 
Paris  : 

"  According  to  your  Lordship's  commands  in  your 
letter  enclosed  by  my  Lord  Preston,  I  have  made  it 
my  endeavour  to  get  a  sight  of  the  MS.  mentioned 
to  y"^  Lordship  of  the  New  Testament.  I  am  assured 
by  a  person  of  great  knowledge  and  understanding  in 
these  matters,  that  there  is  not  only  that  but  7  or  8 
more  in  the  same  Library  of  the  late  Mons.  Colbert 
which  I  may  have  the  collation  of,  and  (that  he  will 
undertake  to  procure  me  leave)  which  never  have 
been  examined.  I  am  assured  by  a  very  ingenious 
man  that  the  collation  of  the  MS.  of  St.  Germain  made 
by  Mons.  Gazon  is  very  imperfect  :  so  that  if  your 
Lordship  has  no  other  I  believe  he  will  furnish  me 
with  those  that  are  more  exact.  It  is  a  MS.  of  about 
1000  years  since,  belonging  to  the  monastery  of  Ste 
Genevieve,  which  Curcelloeus  had  the  use  of,  but  having 
given  no  account  (as  was  done  in  the  Oxford  Collations) 
from  what  MSS  he  took  his  various  lections  they  are 
of  little  use."  After  offering  to  get  copies  of  these 
"  and  others  to  the  number  of  20  or  more,"  Wake  says  : 
*  If  your  Lordship  desires  no  others  than  of  that  MSS 


1737]      CONTROVERSY  WITH  BOSSUET  5 


I  first  mentioned,  and  the  review  of  that  of  St.  Germain, 
I  hope  in  a  fortnight's  time  after  I  shall  have  the 
honour  of  receiving  your  Lordship's  commands  to 
despatch  them  to  you." 

It  was  something  which  happened  during  Wake's 
stay  in  Paris  with  Preston  that  started  him  in  what 
turned  out  to  be  a  protracted  controversy  with  the 
renowned  Bossuet  on  points  of  Romanist  Doctrine. 
Bossuet  was  Bishop  of  Condom,  but  resigned  that 
office  on  being  appointed  tutor  to  the  Dauphin  :  in 
1 68 1  he  was  made  Bishop  of  Meaux.  Bossuet  was  a 
controversialist  of  the  highest  skill,  Hallam's  description 
of  him  as  "  the  eagle  of  Meaux,  lordly  of  form,  fierce 
of  eye,  and  terrible  in  his  beak  and  claw,"  is  well  known. 
It  says  something  for  Wake's  learning  and  confidence 
in  his  own  learning  that  at  thirty  he  should  have 
crossed  swords  with  so  doughty  a  foe.  It  fell  out 
thus  :  Bossuet  had  put  forth  a  work  called  An  Exposition 
of  the  Doctrine  of  the  CatPiolic  Church,  with  the  object 
of  grounding  the  celebrated  Turenne  in  the  Romish 
creed.  In  its  original  form  it  wanted,  as  Wake 
declares,  the  chapters  on  the  Eucharist,  Tradition,  the 
authority  of  the  Church  and  Pope,  which  afterwards 
appeared  as  part  of  it,  and  generally  stated  the  Roman 
creed  in  terms  as  little  likely  to  offend  Protestants  as 
possible.  But  it  got  the  approval  of  the  Archbishop 
of  Rheims  and  nine  other  bishops.  Bossuet  however 
wanted  more,  and  just  before  the  general  issue  of  the 
work  applied  to  the  Sorbonne  for  its  imprimatur 
But  the  theologians  of  the  Sorbonne  instead  of  this 
marked  several  passages  as  being  so  incomplete  as  to 
be  a  perversion  of  the  true  Roman  doctrine.  The 
first  impression  was  hastily  suppressed  ;  the  defective 
passages  were  omitted  or  corrected,  and  with  all  speed  a 
new  edition  was  issued  as  if  there  had  been  no  earlier 
one.  But  somehow  Wake  had  got  into  his  hands  a  copy 
of  the  first  impression,  marked,  as  he  says,  by  the  doctors 
of  the  Sorbonne. 


6 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Charles  11.  died  on  the  6th  February  1685.  Preston 
was  soon  recalled  by  James  11.  for  high  work  at  home, 
and  in  the  course  of  1685  Wake  returned  to  England 
with  his  patron. 

In  1686  he  published,  in  answer  to  Bossuet,  his 
Exposition  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England.  By 
way  of  preface  to  his  work  Wake  relates  the  appearance 
of  the  first  and  of  the  amended  editions  of  Bossuet 's 
work,  and  that  Bossuet  himself  had  been  charged 
with  the  change  in  the  latter.  "  I  don't  hear,"  he 
says,  "  that  he  has  ever  yet  thought  fit  to  deny  the 
relation  either  in  the  advertisement  prefixed  to  the 
later  edition  of  his  book  wherein  he  replies  to  some 
other  passages  of  the  same  treatise  or  in  any  other 
vindication.  .  .  .  Certainly  it  appears  to  us  not  only 
to  give  a  clear  account  of  the  design  and  genius  of  the 
whole  book,  but  to  be  a  plain  demonstration,  how 
improbable  soever  Mons.  de  Meaux  would  represent  it, 
that  it  is  not  impossible  for  a  bishop  of  the  Church 
of  Rome  either  not  to  be  sufficiently  instructed 
in  his  religion  to  know  what  is  the  doctrine  of  it, 
or  not  sufficiently  sincere  to  represent  it  without 
disguise." 

As  regards  his  own  treatise.  Wake  says  :  "I  have 
suffered  myself  to  be  persuaded  to  pursue  the  method 
of  Mons.  de  Meaux's  exposition  as  to  the  doctrine  of 
the  Church  of  England,  and  to  oppose  sincerely  to 
what  he  pretends  is  the  opinion  of  the  Roman  Church 
that  form  of  faith  that  is  openly  professed  and  taught 
without  any  disguise  or  dissimulation  among  us." 

This  work  was  followed  by  a  war  of  pamphlets. 
Bossuet  issued  a  Vindication.  Wake  replied  in  a 
Defence  of  his  Exposition ;  Bossuet  followed  with  a 
Reply  ;  then  Wake  had  a  second  Defence,  and  Bossuet 
a  Full  answer  to  the  second  Defence. 

Wake  wound  up  with  a  State  of  the  Controversy, 
giving  a  list  of  the  books  written  on  both  sides  during 
its  continuance.    He  earned  at  any  rate  the  approval 


1737]  SERMONS  IN  LONDON 


7 


of  one  worthy  critic.    Evelyn's  entry  in  his  Diary 
for  New  Year's  Day,  1687,  is:  "  Mr.  Wake  preached 
at  St.  Martin's  on  i  Timothy  iii.  16,  concerning  the 
mystery  of  Godhness.    He  wrote  excellently  in  answer 
to  the  Bishop  of  Meaux." 

Wake's  fame  as  a  preacher  was  fast  growing.  A 
volume  of  sermons  published  a  few  years  later  contains 
one  preached  in  Paris  on  30th  January  1685,  and 
another  the  same  year  preached  at  Gray's  Inn.  He 
preached  for  Tenison,  his  predecessor  in  the  Primacy, 
then  Rector  of  St.  Martin's-in-the-Fields  and  a  leading 
clergyman,  and  he  was  undoubtedly  on  terms  of  intimate 
friendship  with  him.  Evelyn  records  that  on  the  20th 
March  1687  he  dined  after  morning  service  at  Dr. 
Tenison's  with  Bishop  Ken,  "  and  that  young,  most 
learned,  pious,  and  excellent  preacher,  Mr.  Wake."  "  In 
the  afternoon,"  he  goes  on,  "  I  went  to  hear  Mr.  Wake 
at  the  new  built  church  of  St.  Anne,  on  Mark  viii.  34, 
upon  the  subject  of  taking  up  the  Cross,  and  strenuously 
behaving  ourselves  in  time  of  persecution  as  this  now 
threatened  to  be." 

In  1688,  on  the  death  of  Dr.  Clagett,  he  was  chosen 
preacher  of  Gray's  Inn.  The  story  goes  that  the 
Honourable  Society  had  been  admonished  by  James  11. 
not  to  fill  up  the  preachership  till  the  royal  pleasure 
was  known,  but  they  replied  that  they  had  already 
elected  Dr.  Wake. 

The  serious  position  of  national  and  public  affairs 
in  the  autumn  of  1688,  though  it  may  have  given 
Wake,  then  a  vigorous  and  rising  man  of  just  over 
thirty,  anxiety,  did  not  prevent  his  taking  the 
important  step  of  marrying.  On  the  ist  October  1688 
he  was  married  at  St.  Giles-in-the- Fields  to  Etheldreda, 
third  daughter  and  co-heiress  of  Sir  William  Hovell 
of  Hillingdon  or  Illington,  Norfolk, — Sharp,  then  Dean 
of  Norwich  afterwards  Archbishop  of  York,  performing 
the  ceremony.    As  we  shall  note  later  on,  Wake  had 

1  Evelyn's  Diary,  ii.  264. 

2 


8 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


a  large  family,  and  from  his  own  correspondence  we 
can  say  without  doubt  that  his  domestic  hfe  was  happy 
in  the  highest  degree.  The  Diary  of  Lady  Cowper, 
the  Lord  Chancellor's  wife,  contains  mention  several 
times  of  Mrs.  Wake,  and  the  frequent  messages  from 
distinguished  correspondents  of  the  archbishop  occurring 
in  letters  preserved  among  the  Wake  MSS  prove  her 
to  have  been  all  an  archbishop's  wife  should  be. 
Certainly  the  famil}^  into  which  he  married  connected 
him  with  persons  in  useful,  if  not  distinguished,  public 
service.  One  sister  of  his  wife  married  William  Folkes, 
a  lawyer  of  eminence  whose  son,  Martyn  Folkes,  was 
President  of  the  Royal  Society .  The  grandson  of  the  other 
sister  was  Sir  Simeon  Stewart,  M.P.  for  Hampshire. 

Wake's  sympathies  were  throughout  with  the  Revo- 
lution and  in  opposition  to  James  11.  He  had  written 
as  a  very  protagonist  of  anti-Romanism  ;  and  now  that 
in  1689  William  and  Mary  were  well  settled  on  the  throne, 
he  went  rapidly  ahead  on  the  road  to  distinction.  On 
the  20th  June  1689  he  was  appointed  a  Canon  of  Christ 
Church,  Oxford  ;  on  the  5th  July  following  he  took  the 
degrees  of  B.D.  and  D.D.,  by  accumulation  going  out 
"  Grand  Compounder,"  and  about  the  same  time  the 
King  and  Queen  made  him  Deputy  Clerk  of  the  Closet. 

In  1693  he  published  An  English  Version  of  the 
Genuine  Epistles  of  the  Apostolical  Fathers,  with  a  Pre- 
liminary Discourse  concerning  the  Right  Use  of  those 
Fathers, — a  book  which  has  always  maintained  its 
position  as  a  standard  theological  work  of  the  Church 
of  England. 

In  his  Preface,  Wake  gives  six  reasons  for  giving 
weight  to  the  Apostolic  Fathers  : — 

1 .  They  were  contemporary  with  the  Apostles  and 

instructed  by  them. 

2.  They  were  men  of  an  eminent  character  in  the 

Church,  and  therefore  could  not  be  ignorant 
of  what  was  taught  in  it. 


1737] 


"  THE  FATHERS " 


9 


3.  They  were  careful  to  preserve  the  Doctrine  of 

Christ  ill  its  purity,  and  to  oppose  such  as  went 
about  to  corrupt  it. 

4.  They  were  men  not  only  of  a  perfect  piety,  but 

of  great  courage  and  constancy,  and  there- 
fore such  as  cannot  be  suspected  to  have 
had  any  design  to  prevaricate  in  this  matter. 

5.  They  were  endued  with  a  large  portion  of  the 

Holy  Spirit,  and  as  such  could  hardly  err  in 
what  they  delivered  as  the  gospel  of  Christ. 

6.  Their  writings  were  approved  by  the  Church  in 

those  days,  which  could  not  be  mistaken  in  its 
approbation  of  them. 

Wake  himself  published  a  new  and  largely  revised 
edition  in  1710.  No  one  seems  ever  to  have  belittled 
Wake's  edition  of  the  Fathers,  except  the  renowned 
Conyers  Middleton,  1683-1750.  This  scholar,  the 
enemy  of  the  great  Bentley— "  fiddling  Conyers,"  as 
Bentley  called  him  from  his  love  of  music, — to  get  over 
the  death  of  his  first  wife,  travelled  abroad,  and  while 
at  Rome  conceived  a  great  dislike,  first  for  the  miracles 
of  the  Romish  Church,  and  afterwards  for  all  miracles. 
Near  the  end  of  his  life,  in  1784,  he  published  his  Free 
Enquiry  into  the  Miraculous  Poivers  of  the  Church.  In 
their  answer  to  this,  Dodwell  and  Church  cited  a  passage 
from  Wake's  version  of  St.  Clement's  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians  as  referring  to  the  miraculous  gifts  of  that 
age.  Wake's  is  undoubtedly  a  free  paraphrase.  Clement's 
words  are  :  "  Let  a,  man  be  faithful.  Let  him  be 
powerful  to  utter  knowledge.  Let  him  be  wise  in 
making  an  exact  judgment  of  words."  Wake's  ex- 
planations of  these  are  :  Of  the  first,  "  that  is  such  a 
faith  by  which  he  is  able  to  work  miracles  ;  of  the  second, 
"  that  is  mystical  knowledge,"  for  to  that  the  expression 
manifestly  relates  ;  of  the  third,  "  for  that  was  another 
gift  common  to  those  times." 

Middleton,   who   was   never   silent   under  attack 


lO 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


or  without  a  reply  to  those  who  would  have  strife  with 
him,  admits  in  his  reply  that  Wake's  paraphrase  asserts 
the  existence  of  miraculous  powers  in  that  age,  but 
avers  he  had  knowingly  omitted  the  passage  from 
his  book  through,  says  he,  "  a  regard  for  the  character 
of  that  venerable  prelate  which  made  me  unwilling  to 
recall  into  public  light  a  paraphrase  which  I  took  to 
be  unworthy  of  him,  and  of  all  others  that  I  had  ever 
observed  to  be  the  most  palpably  forced  and  dressed 
up  without  any  ground  or  colour  from  the  text  to  serve 
the  point  he  was  inculcating  concerning  the  continuance 
of  the  miraculous  powers  to  the  times  of  these  apostolic 
fathers." 

There  really  seems  little  to  cavil  at  in  Wake's  para- 
phrase, taken  as  a  paraphrase.  Dodwell  and  Church's 
use  of  Wake's  language  as  a  plain  reference  to  miraculous 
gifts  in  St.  Clement's  time  seems  open  to  more  doubt. 

An  Act  had  been  passed  in  the  year  1685  in  the 
first  Parliament  of  James  11.,  making  part  of  the  parish 
of  St.  Martin 's-in-the- Fields  into  a  distinct  parish  of  St. 
James',  the  Act  providing  that  Dr.  Tenison  should  be 
Rector  of  the  new  parish  as  well  as  Vicar  of  St.  Martin's. 
He  held  both  livings  till  his  appointment  as  Bishop  of 
Lincoln  in  January  1692,  and  six  months  after  in  com- 
mendam.  According  to  the  statement  by  Le  Neve,i 
a  curious  dispute  arose  as  to  who  was  to  succeed  Tenison 
both  at  St.  Martin's  and  St.  James'.  The  Act  founding 
St.  James'  had  given  the  next  Presentation  to  that 
Rectory  after  the  death  of  Tenison  or  next  avoidance 
to  the  Bishop  of  London,  who  in  July  1692  presented 
Dr.  Birch  to  it.  The  Crown  apparently  claimed  the 
right  to  present,  and  presented  Wake,  and  the  result 
was,  according  to  Le  Neve,  a  qiiare  impedit  against 
the  bishop  for  not  admitting  Wake  on  the  King's 
presentation.  On  the  trial  of  this  in  the  King's  Bench 
the  bishop  lost,  and  again  on  appeal  to  the  Lords.  So, 
on  24th  January  1694,  Wake  was  admitted  to  the 
*  Le  Neve's  Protestant  Bishops,  242. 


1737] 


DEAN  OF  EXETER 


Rectory  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  by  virtue  of  a 
writ  from  the  King's  Bench  for  that  purpose. 

Wake  was  a  dihgent  parish  priest :  in  the  Preface  to 
the  later  edition  of  his  Catechism,  he  says  that  that  work 
was  originally  compiled  by  him  for  the  use  of  his  parish- 
ioners, amongst  whom  he  was  strenuous  in  the  public 
catechising  of  the  young  on  the  afternoon  of  Sunday. 

Wake's  fame  as  a  preacher  was,  indeed,  now  well 
established.  We  find  him  preaching  a  funeral  sermon 
for  Queen  Mary  in  1694,  and  again  preaching  on  a 
Public  Fast  ordered  for  5th  April  1699  on  behalf  of  the 
exiled  Vaudois  and  French  Protestants.  Perhaps  he 
had  learned  to  sympathise  with  these  latter  during 
his  stay  in  Paris  as  Preston's  chaplain. 

On  the  1 6th  February  1 701,  Wake  was  appointed 
Dean  of  Exeter. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  in  the  great  controversy 
in  the  closing  years  of  the  seventeenth  century  about 
Convocation,  Wake  and  Atterbury  had  written  on 
opposite  sides.  It  is  pleasant  to  know  that  they  were 
reconciled  even  before  either  of  them  became  a  bishop. 
Atterbury  seems  to  have  thought  he  had  written  too 
acrimoniously,  and  to  have  been  anxious  for  a  recon- 
ciliation. This  was  the  more  desirable,  for,  as  he  had  been 
appointed  Archdeacon  of  Totnes  in  the  year  Wake  went 
as  Dean  to  Exeter,  they  were  members  of  the  same 
Chapter.  Very  properly  Trelawney,  Bishop  of  Exeter, 
seems  to  have  been  a  go-between.  Writing  to  him  in 
1 704,  Atterbury  says  that  a  report  had  got  about  that 
he  had  apologised  to  Wake  for  some  expressions  in 
his  Rights,  Powers,  and  Privileges  of  an  English  Con- 
vocation,^ acknowledging  himself  in  error  in  some 
points  in  the  controversy.  A  few  months  later  Tre- 
lawney forwards  a  letter  of  Wake's  to  Atterbury.  In 
this  letter  Wake  is  fearful  the  old  controversy  might 
break  out  in  the  Chapter  at  Exeter.  "  I  am  firmly 
resolved,"  writes  Atterbury,  "  ever  to  behave  myself 
1  See  Lathbury's  Convocation,  462. 


12  WILLIAM  WAKE  [1716- 


towards  the  Dean  with  the  respect  that  is  due  to  his 
station.  As  for  the  dispute  about  the  rights  of  convoca- 
tion, your  Lordship  may  depend  upon  it  that,  if  ever  I 
pursue  it,  it  shall  be  in  as  inoffensive  a  way  as  is  possible, 
and  with  a  due  acknowledgment  of  the  Dean's  civilities 
to  me." 

In  the  circumstances  in  which  Anne  found  herself 
on  coming  to  the  throne,  it  is  not  surprising  that  within 
three  years  of  her  accession  Wake  was  raised  to  the 
Episcopal  Bench.  That  he  was  pious  and  a  theologian 
of  great  learning  even  his  enemies,  if  he  had  any,  could 
not  deny  :  his  reputation  as  a  parish  priest  and  preacher 
was  good.  We  can  well  understand  how,  when  multi- 
tudes, may  we  say  a  majority,  of  the  better  sort  of 
clergy  had  either  nonjuror  sj^mpathies  or  were  even 
dallying  with  the  hope  or  thought  of  a  Jacobite  revolu- 
tion, Anne's  advisers  were  glad  to  be  able  to  promote  to 
a  bishopric  one  who,  with  such  qualifications  for  a  mitre, 
was  of  Whig  principles,  favourable  to  Toleration  and 
firmly  anti- Jacobite.  But  his  promotion  was  not  a 
matter  of  course. 

The  vacancy  arose  at  Lincoln,  where  Bishop  Gardiner 
died  early  in  1705  Anne,  though  she  had  not  for- 
saken her  Whig  ministers  or  adopted  Harley  as  her 
friend — and  though  the  great  Sarah,  Duchess  of  Marl- 
borough, was  not  yet  supplanted  by  her  own  relative 
Mrs .  Masham — was  very  devoted  to  her  Church  principles, 
and  was  anxious  to  put  Sir  William  Dawes,  a  strong 
Tory,  at  Lincoln.  The  biographer  of  Archbishop  Sharp 
says  :  "  Dawes  ^  was  a  man  of  most  noble  presence,  with 
every  grace  of  voice  and  manner  ;  also  a  man  of  gravity 
and  prudence,  of  decency  and  courtesy,  of  singular 
presence  of  mind,  of  extraordinary  resolution  and 
constancy,  of  exemplary  regularity  and  exactness  in 
all  parts  of  life." 

But  Dawes  had  to  wait  :  in  Anne's  more  serious 
relapse  from  Whiggism  three  years  later,  he  was  made 

1  Biog.  Brit.,  4088. 


1737] 


BISHOP  OF  LINCOLN 


13 


Bishop  of  Chester,  and  ended  his  days  at  York.  It  was 
not  the  moment  then  for  so  violent  a  Tory  as  the 
majestic,  courtly  Dawes  to  be  promoted.  On  the 
30th  January  1705  he  had  preached  before  the  Queen, 
and  had  given  utterance  to  most  uncompromising  views 
about  Divine  right  and  non-resistance.  There  was  still 
a  Pretender  over  the  water,  and  Harley  and  St.  John, 
moderate  Tories,  as  well  as  Marlborough  and  Godolphin, 
Whigs,  were  frightened  ;  so  Wake  was  appointed. 

So  far  back  as  March  1705,  Tenison  had  written  to 
Wake,  sounding  him  as  to  his  acceptance  of  the  vacant 
see.  They  had  been  friends,  as  we  have  seen,  and 
fellow-workers  in  London.  If  Wake  was  generally 
esteemed,  he  had  no  stronger  admirer  than  the  Primate. 

"  Your  friends  hope,"  writes  Tenison  from  Lambeth, 
"  that  you  will  let  them  know  by  me  without  loss  of 
time  whether  you  would  accept  of  the  Bishopric  of 
Lincoln  with  a  living  in  Commendam  for  one  year  if 
they  can  procure  it.  ...  I  am  in  pain  till  I  hear  from 
you,  because  I  am  press'd  by  them.  I  hope  you  will 
not  say  No." — Y'  loving  brother, 

"  T.  Canterbury."  ^ 

The  original  letter,  according  to  Wake's  custom, 
bears  a  careful  endorsement  in  Wake's  own  hand  : 
"  The  archbp  proposes  the  Bprick  of  Lincoln  to  me 
with  ye  commendam." 

Letters  from  all  quarters  pressed  him  to  accept 
Lincoln.  He  seems  to  have  demurred.  Chaslett,  the 
Master  of  University  College,  Oxford,  writes  with  what 
seems  undue  severity,  referring  to  his  '  repeated  ter- 
giversations and  demurs,'  and  goes  on  :  "  You  will  be 
much  reproached  by  all  y"^  friends  if  you  neglect  this 
opportunity  to  serve  so  considerable  a  part  of  the 
English  Church,  so  intolerably  neglected  by  Bishop 
Barlow."  Barlow  had  been  one  of  the  six  bishops — 
Parker  of  Oxford,  Crewe  of  Durham,  Wood  of  Lichfield 
(suspended  for  immorality),  and  Watson  of  St.  David's 

>  Wake  Corr.,  1705. 


14 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


(deprived  for  simony) — who  had  thanked  James  11.  for 
his  Declaration  of  Indulgence.^ 

When  he  had  accepted,  many  congratulations  flowed 
in.    That  from  Burnet  of  Salisbury  is  interesting  : 

"  Salisbury,  Michaelmas  Day,  1705. 

"  My  dear  Lord, — I  do  sincerely  congratulate  not 
so  much  to  yourself  as  to  the  Church,  and  particularly 
to  our  whole  order,  the  honour  of  having  you  one  of  it. 
And  tho'  you  have  a  very  laborious  post  in  the  vineyard 
and  but  small  encouragement  proportioned  to  the 
greatness  of  the  labour,  yet  I  am  confident  you  who 
have  hitherto  laboured  so  eminently  as  well  as  success- 
fully in  the  former  degree  will  shine  as  bright  in  the 
higher  and  be  an  example  to  your  brethren  in  it.  I 
humbly  thank  you  for  the  honour  you  do  me  in  desiring 
me  to  assist  at  y'  consecration,  where  I  am  sure  the 
greater  will  be  blessed  of  the  lesser.  I  will  come  up  as 
soon  as  you  tell  me  the  day  is  fixed.  ...  I  hope  you 
are  to  be  more  and  more  a  blessing  to  this  Church,  which 
God  knows  wants  faithfull  labourers.  That  you  may 
be  blessed  in  your  Labours  is  the  earnest  praier  of  my 
dear  Lord. — Your  most  obedient  and  most  humble 
servant  and  brother,  G.  Sarum."  ^ 

"  Mrs.  Burnet  sends  both 
you  and  your  good  lady  her 
most  hearty  respects  and 
service,  to  which  I  crave  leave 
to  join  mine." 

"  Bp  of  Sarum  at  my  consecration,"  is  Wake's 
endorsement. 

His  brethren  of  Ely,  Carlisle,  and  Worcester  wrote 
him  letters  of  congratulation. 

Wake  was  installed  on  the  i6th  January  1706,  and 
he  carefully  preserves  the  forms  used,  also  a  note  of  the 
fees  amounting  to  ;^i8  i6s.  on  his  enthronisation  to  the 
Dean  and  Chapter,  the  Chapter  Clerk,  Vicars  Choral, 
including  a  payment  in  lieu  of  a  collation  to  the  Vicars 
Choral.  He,  after  a  year,  took  up  his  residence  at 
Buckden,  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln's  palace. 

1  Here's  Hist.  Eng.  Church,  i.  19.  ^  Wake  MSS,  1705. 


1737] 


SAMUEL  WESLEY 


15 


The  Wake  MSS,  now  preserved  in  Christchurch 
Library  at  Oxford,  supply  evidence  that  Wake  was 
careful  and  diligent  as  a  bishop.  It  seems  to  have  been 
his  practice  himself  to  endorse  every  official  letter  or 
document  coming  to  his  hands  with  a  note  of  its  purport 
— often  a  draft  answer  in  his  own  writing,  much  cor- 
rected and  revised,  is  appended.  Of  these  originals 
twenty-five  folio-bound  volumes  are  now  at  Christ 
Church,  seven  dealing  with  Lincoln  and  ten  with  Canter- 
bury. Much  of  them  is  what  any  careful  bishop's 
correspondence  would  show — questions  of  tithes,  repairs 
of  vicarages,  contributions  to  churches  and  schools,  dis- 
pensations for  non-residence,  presentations  to  livings  ; 
many  documents  are  of  more  particular  interest. 

Samuel  Wesley,  father  of  the  great  John  and  Charles, 
was  a  beneficed  clergyman  in  the  Lincoln  diocese,  and 
very  early  in  Wake's  episcopate  he  got  into  correspond- 
ence with  the  bishop.  Wesley,  who  had  fallen  into  great 
pecuniary  difficulties,  largely  through  his  numerous 
family, — the  great  Charles,  the  hymn- writer,  was  his 
eighteenth  child, — published  a  poem  on  the  battle  of 
Blenheim,  for  which  Marlborough  gave  him  the  chap- 
laincy of  a  regiment ;  but  in  June  1 705  he  was  imprisoned 
in  Lincoln  Castle  for  debt,  and  remained  there  for  seven 
months.  Wake  preserved  a  long  letter  from  him,  dated 
Lincoln  Castle,  4th  October  1705,  which  begins  : 

"  I  don't  care  to  write  to  your  Lordship  the  first  time 
from  this  place,  but  would  fain  have  gott  outt  before  I 
had  troubled  you  with  these  impertinences.  Tho'  now 
I  see,  I  amn't  likely  to  stir  in  haste  but  must  make  a 
winter  campaign  here,  I  can  no  longer  deny  myself  the 
Honour  of  congratulating  your  Lordship's  promotion  to  a 
higher  order  in  the  Church  of  God,  and  especially  that  my 
own  Lot  is  fallen  under  your  Lordship's  paternal  care."  ^ 

Wesley  goes  on  to  attribute  his  troubles  to  the 
Dissenters,  who  were  angry  at  the  books  he  had  written 
about  them.   He  says  :  "  I  saw  the  growing  power  and 

1  Wake  MSS,  1705. 


i6 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


insolence  of  the  Dissenters  and  their  party,  and  that  the 
Church,  tlie  Clergy,  and  the  Universities  were  every  day 
insulted  in  their  writings."  Wesley  had  accordingly 
written  to  the  Whig  candidate  in  his  constituency,  who 
happened  to  be  a  friend,  explaining  why  he  could  not 
vote  for  him.  His  friends  the  Dissenters  and  their  ad- 
herents reported  that  there  was  treason  in  what  Wesley 
wrote  ..."  and  threatened  to  send  up  my  letter,  with 
such  a  Recommendation,"  he  goes  on,  "  as  sh*^  doe  my 
business  and  turn  me  out  of  the  Regiment  which  the 
Duke  of  Marlborough  had  given  me  and  that  after  this 
they'd  throw  me  into  gaol ;  and  have,  I  thank  'em,  bin  as 
good  as  their  words  in  both.  They  disturbed  me  and 
another  clergyman  in  the  Church  at  Divine  Service,  pro- 
claimed me  by  name  Rogue  and  Rascal  at  the  head  of 
the  mob,  tho'  I  never  affronted  'em,  as  I  never  shunn'd 
'em  ;  shouted,  huzza'd,  drum'd,  and  fired  guns  and  pistols 
night  and  day  under  my  windows  where  my  wife  was 
newly  laid  in  childbed  (of  our  sixteenth  child) ,  called  to  my 
children  in  the  yard, '  Ye  devils,  weel  come  and  turn  ye 
all  out  o'  doors  a-begging  shortly  1  '  (what  had  those 
Lambs  done  ?).  For  the  finishing  stroke  they  threw  me 
into  gaol  here  for  a  debt  to  a  Relation  of  that  person  to 
whom  I  wrote  the  letter  which  they  might  easil}'  doe 
when  they  had  sunk  what  little  credit  my  many  mis- 
fortunes had  left  me  by  taking  away  my  regiment."  His 
adversary  insisted  he  must  pay  or  else  go  on  to  prison  ; 
"  whither,"  says  he,  "  I  came  with  a  cheerful  heart  and  a 
very  light  pocket  (a  little  more  than  paid  my  garnish 
and  saved  me  from  stripping).  I  find  a  gaol  is  not  so 
dismall  a  place  as  'tis  painted, and  that  one  mayservGod 
as  well  here  as  at  liberty  and  perhaps  better  or  else  I 
believ  I  should  never  have  been  sent  hither.  ...  I  read 
Prayers  to  my  Fellow-prisoners  twice  a  day  and  preach 
on  Sundays.  Most  of  'em  are  outwardly  more  civilised 
than  when  I  came  hither  and  I  hope  some  are  really 
better,  which  if  I  were  sure  of,  twould  make  this  place 
not  only  tolerable  but  comfortable  to  me." 


1737]       S.  WESLEY'S  MINISTRATIONS  17 


He  goes  on  to  say  "  how  his  enemies  had  stabb'd  his 
cows  so  as  to  starve  his  family  who  had  '  had  but  three 
joints  of  meat  for  several  weeks  after  his  incarceration.'  " 
He  winds  up,  "  Our  people  in  the  Castle  are  desirous  of  a 
sacrament ;  'tis  exempt  from  any  parish  :  if  your  Lord- 
ship please  to  give  me  leave  I'll  administer  it  with  due 
caution  as  to  the  people  I  admit." 

The  letter  is  signed  :  "  Sam  Wesley,  Prisoner." 

Wake  seems  to  have  answered  kindly,  and  to  have 
given  directions  as  to  the  Communion  Service  in  the 
prison,  for,  on  the  nth  November  1 705 ,  Wesley  writes 
from  Epworth  to  Wake  as  follows  : 

"  My  Lord, — I  humbly  hope  yr  Lordship's  pardon 
for  my  making  no  speedier  return  to  the  Favour  of  yr 
Lordship's  which  I  received  in  prison  ;  which  delay  was 
partly  owing  to  the  hurry  of  my  affairs  and  partly  to  my 
desire  to  send  the  news  of  my  liberty  and  being  restored 
by  the  signal  Providence  of  God  and  the  kindness  of  my 
Friends  to  my  own  Family  and  cure  with  most  of  my 
debts  pay'd  and  sufficient  in  good  hands  at  least  to  clear 
the  rest  :  nor  can  I  be  more  careful  than  I  was  formerly, 
tho'  I  can  now  afford  to  be  a  better  husband. 

"  I  owe  yr  Lordship  an  acct  of  what  happened  in  my 
prison  in  pursuance  of  yr  Lordship's  permission  to  me  to 
administer  the  Sacrament  there  on  Mr.  Chanter's  con- 
sent. I  took  the  method  which  I  promis'd  and  which  I 
wish  were  practicable  in  other  places  especially  when 
persons  first  receiv.  Having  read  the  Exhortation  and 
preach 'd  twice  on  the  Sacrament,  those  who  were  desirous 
to  communicate  were  with  me  the  week  before,  and  having 
made  myself  pretty  well  acquainted  with  their  circum- 
stances I  gave  them  the  best  advice  I  could :  they  reed  with 
great  appearance  of  seriousness  and  devotion.  ...  I 
preach 'd  my  last  sermon  wherein  I  took  m^'  leave  of  'em 
from  107  Psalm  15-16  v.  and  hope  by  the  sorrow  they 
generally  express 'd  at  my  leaving  'em  that  it  has  not  bin 
altogether  my  own  fault  if  I  have  had  more  enemys  in 
other  places.  The  chief  subject  of  their  Lamentation 
was  that  they  must  now  be  depriv'd  of  those  constant 
prayers  and  sermons  which  they  had  for  some  time 
enjoy'd.  I  must  own  my  Lord  !  that  this  did  sensibly 
affect  me.  .  .  ,  I  wish  with  all  my  heart  it  were  in  my 


i8 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


power  still  to  assist  those  poor  creatures  with  what  they 
most  need  .  .  .  Your  Lordship  says  in  yours  you  desire 
they  might  have  these  things  constantly  performed.  .  .  . 
tho'  I  live  at  twenty  miles  distance  and  som  of  the  way 
is  very  bad  I  wou'd  freely  do  my  part  and  more  gladly 
preach  my  course  in  the  Castle  Four  times  a  year  than 
in  the  Minster  for  the  best  Prebend  there."  After  say- 
ing that  his  chief  opponent  in  the  parish  had  died, 
"  this,"  he  goes  on,  "  left  my  people  at  liberty  to  shew 
their  inclinations  on  my  return,  which  they  did  by 
coming  to  meet  me  in  considerable  numbers  and  conduct- 
ing me  home.  So  tender  a  father  as  your  Lordship  will 
easily  guess  what  a  meeting  I  had  with  my  family." 

He  goes  on  to  ask  for  directions  as  to  baptizing  chil- 
dren where  one  or  both  of  the  parents  stands  excom- 
municate. 

Wake's  endorsement  is  : 

"  Answer 'd  Jan.  3. 

"  Congratulate  his  enlargement.  Thank  him  for  his 
service  in  prison.  Approved  his  project,  which  I  this 
night  proposed  by  letter  to  the  Chaunter.  Gave  him 
leave  to  baptize  adults,  keeping  a  particular  register  of 
'em  and  exhibiting  their  names  at  the  Bp's  visitation." 

"  Advised  to  baptize  the  children  of  excommunicate 
persons  not  being  heretics  or  schismatics  ;  but  especially 
where  one  of  the  parents  was  not  excommunicate." 

There  is  a  letter  of  Samuel  Wesley  from  Epworth, 
4th  August  1 71 2,  to  Wake,  in  which,  after  thanking  the 
bishop  for  visiting  and  confirming  at  Epworth,  he  wishes 
that  the  bishop's  directions  had  been  followed  at  the 
Confirmation  : 

"  for  want  of  requiring  the  names  of  the  candidates  to  be 
given  in  by  the  Clergyman  great  numbers  were  confirmed 
here  who  ought  not  to  have  bin  (and  I  know  'tis  the  same 
in  other  places  and  dioceses).  Many  of  them  had  been 
before,  some  of  them  twice  or  thrice  over,  and  others  who 
were  no  ways  fit  for  it." 

He  refers  to  the  charge  which  Wake  had  delivered  at 
his  visitation,  and  says  that  he  is  "  so  unhappy  as  to 
differ  from  your  Lordship  in  the  point  of  the  validity  of 


1737]  LAY  BAPTISM  19 

Lay  Baptism.  .  .  .  For  this  reason  I  earnestly  wish  I 
cd  see  a  copy  of  yr  Lordship's  arguments  which  it  was 
hardly  possible  to  weigh  as  one  ought  at  once  hearing." 

The  draft  or  note  of  Wake's  reply  in  his  own  hand- 
writing is  : 

"  For  the  business  of  my  charge,  it  having  never  yet 
been  written,  cannot  be  communicated  to  you.  Some 
few  heads  and  the  words  of  such  quotations  as  I  designed 
to  make  use  of  were  set  down  in  a  small  Leaf  or  two 
within  the  cover  of  my  Visitation  booke  ;  but  that  was 
all.  ... 

"  As  to  the  subject  of  my  Discourse  you  may  remember 
that  my  businesse  was  not  to  enter  into  the  merits  of  the 
cause  but  to  shew  wt  had  been  and  still  continues  to  be 
ye  sense  and  practice  of  the  Ch  of  E  in  the  particulars 
spoken  to  by  me.  And  I  think  'tis  clear  even  to  Demon- 
stration that  she  utterly  forbids  any  but  a  lawful 
Minister  to  baptize,  yet  she  allows  not  of  any  to  be  re- 
baptized  who  have  been  baptized  with  water  and  the 
due  form  established  by  our  Saviour,  which  alone  she 
declares  to  be  the  essential  parts  of  baptism. 

"  For  myself  I  openly  profess 'd,  as  you  may  well 
remember,  my  utter  dislike  of  lay  and  schismatical 
Baptisms.  ...  If  the  Ch  of  E  shall  think  fit  without 
declaring  such  Baptisms  to  be  utterly  null  (which  is 
merely  a  point  of  speculation  and  wd  be  contrary  to 
the  sense  as  well  as  practice  of  the  Ch  confessed  by  Mr. 
Dodwell  from  the  loth  century  downward)  to  order 
persons  so  baptized  to  be  hypothetically  re-baptized 
I  shall  submit  to  her  orders  so  made  tho'  I  cannot  join 
in  the  making  of  such  a  constitution.  But  while  instead 
thereof  her  orders  and  practice  both  run  the  other  way, 
while  she  only  disallows  the  practice  of  Lay  Baptism, 
but  does  not  annull  the  Act,  but  pursuant  to  the  whole 
course  of  antiqy  plainly  allows  of  it,  I  think  it  my  duty 
to  conform  myself  to  her  Directions  and  to  give  notice 
to  my  clergy  that  I  cannot  consent  to  their  Departure 
from  them." 

In  April  1706  he  receives  from  the  archbishop  the 
notice  from  the  Privy  Council  requiring  the  clergy  to 
give  an  "  exact  and  particular  "  account  of  the  Papists 


20  WILLIAM  WAKE  [1716^ 

and  reputed  Papists  in  every  parish  with  their  "  quahties, 
estates,  and  places  of  abode,  also  of  the  livings  in  their 
gift."  The  Archdeacon  of  Leicester  returns,  for  the 
eleven  parishes  in  his  archdeaconry^,  in  all  thirtj'^-five 
Papists  or  reputed  Papists,  most  of  them  of  humble 
station.  The  Archdeacon  of  Bedford  returns  for  a  parish 
called  Turvey  three  or  four  families  tenants  to  Lord 
Peterboro,  in  his  four  other  parishes  about  five  Papists 
or  reputed  Papists.  The  Minister  of  St.  Martin's, 
Leicester,  is  very  general  in  his  return,  "  one  feme 
covert." 

Wake's  connection  with  Samuel  Wesley  was  actively 
renewed  in  the  autumn  of  1709.  There  exists  a  petition 
of  seven  of  the  leading  inhabitants  of  Epworth,  dated 
October  28th,i  in  that  year,  asking  the  bishop's  help  to 
buy  a  house  for  the  "  sober,  religious,  and  industrious 
Schoolmaster  "  they  had  in  their  village  who  had  been 
offered  a  school  "  with  a  house  with  a  settled  salary 
at  another  place."  Poor  Wesley's  troubles  seem  to  have 
continued,  for  the  petition  states  "  our  Rector,  who  had 
subscribed  £5,  has  withdrawn  his  subscription  since  the 
late  misfortune  of  his  House." 

Wake  as  bishop  was  careful  in  admitting  candidates 
to  Holy  Orders,  as  appears  from  the  two  following  letters, 
the  former  of  which  is  to  him  from  a  gentleman  of  title  : 

"  This  waits  upon  your  Lordship  on  ye  behalf  of  the 
bearer  my  brother,  who  had  the  misfortune  to  be  turn'd 
back  last  ordinat".  I  doe  not  in  the  least  doubt  yr 
Lordship's  justice,  but  I  have  reason  to  believe  my 
brother  was  treated  with  some  severity  by  those  who 
gave  an  account  to  you  of  his  performance.  I  beg 
leave  therefore  to  acquaint  yr  Ldship  with  it  ;  and  hope 
your  goodness  will  pardon  this  piece  of  presumption." 

The  annexed  draft  reply  runs  : 

"  Pursuant  to  your  desire  I  this  day  sent  for  the  young 
gent  alone  into  my  study,  Mr.  Archdeacon  and  my 
Chaplain  being  with  me  and  witnesses  of  wt  pass'd. 

1  Wake  MSS,  1 709. 


1737]  "  RELIGIOUS  SOCIETIES  "  21 

After  having  made  a  short  experiment  of  him  in  the 
Greek  Testament,  I  proceeded  to  examine  him  in  English, 
and  only  in  the  Articles  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  in  order 
as  they  are.  I  asked  no  questions  out  of  the  way, 
but  only  the  plain  sense  and  meaning  of  each  article 
without  entering  into  any  further  particulars  concerning 
them.  Some  few  proofs  of  Sere  (Scripture)  I  put  him 
upon  where  the  passages  were  ordinary  to  everybody 
who  knew  anything  at  all  of  these  matters  ;  but  not 
otherwise.  I  am  sorry  to  say,  and  upon  the  whole,  he 
appeared  to  all  of  us  by  no  means  qualified  for  Holy 
Orders  ;  and  Mr.  Archdeacon  profess 'd  he  could  not 
present  him  according  to  the  solemn  form  which  our 
Ch  requires  ;  nor  indeed  could  I  think  myselfe  at 
liberty  to  ordain  him  if  he  would.  I  verily  believe 
the  young  gent  (whom  I  heartily  pitty)  has  done  his 
utmost  to  fit  himselfe  for  the  sacred  Ministry.  But  I 
fear  it  will  be  difficult  for  him  so  far  to  overcome  the 
natural  defects  he  has  to  struggle  with  as  ever  to  attain 
to  any  suitable  qualifications  for  it.  This  makes  me 
earnestly  wish  some  other  more  suitable  businesse  might 
be  found  out  for  him." 

The  "  Religious  Societies  "  established  at  the  close 
of  the  seventeenth  century  in  London,  of  which  the 
Societies  for  the  Reformation  of  Manners  were  an 
offshoot,  had  by  1712,  as  Mr.  Hore  says,  spread  "to 
almost  every  large  town  of  England."  ^  On  the  8th 
November  1712  the  Rector  of  Hertford  writes  to  the 
Bishop  of  Lincoln  : 

"  I  think  it  my  duty  to  acquaint  your  Lordship  that 
there  are  several  well  disposed  young  men  in  my  parish 
members  of  the  Ch  of  England  who  have  lately  begun 
to  meet  together  once  a  week  as  a  Religious  Society 
after  the  manner  of  those  in  London.  They  desire 
that  I  wd  encourage  them  by  coming  amongst  them, 
and  that  I  wd  let  them  meet  in  the  Church."  After 
saying  that  some  of  his  parishioners  and  others  have 
no  good  opinion  of  these  societies,  he  proceeds  :  "  I 
crave  your  Lordship's  pardon  for  troubling  you  with 
this  and  another  case  which  is  as  follows.  The  Barbers 
in  my  parish  do  all  absent  themselves  from  publick 

^  i.  169. 


22 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


worship  on  the  Lord's  Day  in  the  mornings,  having  their 
customers  in  the  time  of  Divine  Service.  ...  I  am  not 
satisfied  to  administer  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  to  any  of  these  men  in  their  sickness  unless  they 
profess  themselves  penitent  for  this  fault," 

There  is  no  draft  of  Wake's  reply  ;  his  note  on  the 
letter  is  :  "  Mr.  Hallows  :  ab*  Societies  :  Barbers  trim- 
ming on  Sundays,  etc."  There  was,  it  is  well  known, 
considerable  opposition  on  the  part  of  Churchmen  to  the 
Societies.  Tenison,  as  we  have  seen,  supported  them, 
but  so  good  a  man  as  Sharp,  Archbishop  of  York,  was 
timid  about  them. 

Nothing  Wake  did  was  surface  or  "  shop  window  " 
work.  We  find  him  having  laborious  search  made  for 
Precedents  of  Patents  and  Forms  of  Licences  in  his 
Registries.  Three  or  four  of  his  immediate  prede- 
cessors, Barlow,  Neal,  Montaign,  supplied  no  precedent. 
There  seems  to  have  been  a  question  as  to  the  extent 
and  origin  of  his  archdeacon's  jurisdiction.  Inquiries 
were  made  of  brother  bishops  and  men  of  learning  ;  not 
much  more  answer  was  forthcoming  than  that  "  the 
bishop  was  the  fountain  of  all  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction 
and  authority." 

Wake  held  his  first  visitation  in  1706.  His  "  Articles 
of  Visitation  and  Enquiry  "  were  exhaustive.  The 
answers  are  annotated  largely  in  his  own  hand.  Some 
of  his  clergy,  as  Samuel  Wesley,  were  zealous  and  efficient ; 
but  there  was  much  neglect.  Over  and  over  again  the 
note  on  a  parish  is  as  follows  :  "  only  a  deacon," 
"  parsonage  house  demolished."  Others  are,  "  a  very 
litigious  naughty  man,"  "  reputed  an  ill  man." 
"  Christens  children  and  churches  women  in  his  house  ; 
makes  his  clerk  read  prayers  at  church,  etc.;  he  is  much 
afflicted  with  the  gout,  and  is  a  rich  man." 

One  of  the  archdeacons  supplies  general  answers  to 
the  visitation  inquiries  for  his  archdeaconry.  After 
having  viewed,  as  he  says,  about  half  the  churches — 
to  the  inquiry  about  the  Font,  the  answer  is  in  many 


1737]  ANSWERS  TO  VISITATION  INQUIRIES  23 


places,  "  Baptism  is  administered  in  a  borrowed  basin 
placed  in  the  Font."  "  The  Communion  tables  are 
generally  mean  and  used  by  the  Glaziers  for  the  working 
of  their  glasse  and  by  schoolboys  for  writing.  I  have 
discouraged  the  keeping  of  School  in  the  Church." 
"  In  some  places  ye  Sacrament  hath  not  been  ad- 
ministered three  times  a  year  for  want  of  a  Congrega- 
tion, as  is  pretended."  "  The  office  of  ye  Visitation 
of  ye  sick  is  generally  complained  of  as  imperfect,  and 
ye  clergy  do  use  a  greater  liberty  than  ye  office  directs." 
There  is  a  case  of  a  clergyman  having  married  his 
deceased  wife's  sister,  probably  the  one  mentioned 
later  :  "  The  Iniquity  is  of  twenty-six  years'  con- 
tinuance "  is  the  note. 

Other  visitations  were  in  1709  and  171 2,  with  a 
curtailed  but  still  very  exhaustive  set  of  questions. 
The  notes  in  Wake's  own  handwriting  show  scrupulous 
care. 

There  are  several  communications  in  the  Wake  MSS 
from  Tenison  signed  "  T.  Canterbury  "  or  "  Tho.  Canter- 
bury " — the  archbishop's  handwriting  becoming  in 
the  later  ones  almost  illegible.  In  July  1706  he  sends 
on  the  Privy  Council's  demand  for  the  particulars  of 
Papists  and  reputed  Papists,  especially  in  exempt 
parishes;  and  again  in  August  171 1  he  endorses  and 
sends  on  the  letter  which  the  Queen  had  addressed  to 
him  as  "  her  right  trusty  and  right  entirely  beloved 
Councellor,"  in  which  she  enjoined  him  to  stir  up  his 
suffragans  and  through  them  the  clergy  generally  to 
put  "  a  timely  stop  to  ye  further  growth  of  infidelity 
and  profaneness,  to  watch  diligently  over  their  flocks, 
to  be  exemplary  in  their  lives,  and  frame  their  public 
Discourses  to  the  people  on  such  subjects  as  do  tend 
most  to  edification."  Wake  in  September  171 1  sends 
this  on  with  a  most  urgent  letter  on  his  own  behalf  :  he 
does  not  think  the  clergy's  "  conversation  "  is  generally 
at  fault  ;  he  is  "  more  doubtful  "  whether  the  Canon 
regulating  "  the  habit  "  of  the  clergy  is  as  well  observed, 
3 


24 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


On  the  importance  of  a  clergyman's  family  and  house- 
hold being  a  model  he  is  very  strong. 

Wake  had  at  this  time  a  house  in  Dean's  Yard, 
Westminster  ;  but  he  was  pretty  constantly  resident 
at  Buckden.  No  one  reading  the  contemporary  docu- 
ments can  fail  to  be  struck  with  the  frequent  mention 
of  the  roads  being  "  unpassable," 

A  point  to  which  Wake  invariably  drew  the  attention 
of  his  clergy  was  the  regular  catechising  of  the  children. 
In  1708  he  republished  a  new  edition  of  his  Principles 
of  the  Christian  Religion  in  a  Brief  Commentary  on  the 
Church  Catechism,  addressing  it  to  the  Archdeacons  and 
rest  of  the  Clergy  of  the  Diocese  of  Lincoln.  In  the 
preface  he  states  the  work  to  have  been  "  composed 
and  published  some  years  ago  for  the  use  of  my  parish. 
It  is  now  reprinted  for  the  benefit  of  my  Diocese." 
The  work  is  in  six  parts,  in  the  form  of  question  and 
answer  on  the  Catechism.  It  is  fortified  copiously  with 
Scripture  texts  in  the  margin.  Points  of  difference 
with  the  Roman  Doctrine,  e.g.  the  administration  of 
the  Communion  in  one  kind  to  the  laity,  are  by  no 
means  omitted.  In  an  address  circulated  by  one  of 
his  archdeacons  among  the  clergy  he  says,  after  em- 
phasising the  necessity  of  public  catechising  : 

"  Accordingly  his  Lordship  has  ordered  his  Book- 
seller to  print  his  own  Catechism  by  way  of  subscription 
at  a  third  part  of  ye  price  any  former  impressions  have 
been  sold  at ;  and  has  made  it  ye  peculiar  priviledge  of 
his  Diocese  to  have  ye  copies  at  so  cheap  a  rate  that 
it  will  not  be  difficult  to  provide  for  yr  families  in  most 
parishes  with  little  charge  to  ye  Incumbents."  He 
reports  to  the  bishop  near  2000  subscriptions. 

The  letter  to  the  bishop  enclosing  the  archidiaconal 
circular  tells  how  some  "  physick "  designed  for  the 
palace  at  Buckden  had  gone  wrong,  and  a  postscript  says  : 
"As  to  ye  Physick  the  Dose  is  from  half  a  teaspoonful 
to  a  whole  one  taken  every  other  night  in  a  glasse  of 
warm  ale  at  going  to  bed  till  ye  pains  are  removed." 


1737]    WAKE  AS  ECCLESIASTICAL  JUDGE  25 


The  incidents  of  Wake's  episcopate  are  probably 
much  hke  those  any  bishop's  diary  in  any  age  would 
record  ;  but  they  are  quaint  to  read  of.  A  parson  has 
a  feud  with  his  squire  based  on  glebe  and  tithe  questions. 
The  squire's  patience  is  exhausted  and  he  sends  items 
of  complaint  to  the  bishop.  "  He  (the  parson)  has 
prosecuted  Labourers  for  profaning  the  Lord's  Day, 
but  he  himself  has  confess 'd  yt  he  has  killed  hares  upon 
that  day."  The  bishop,  as  a  fair  judge,  submits  the 
complaints  to  the  vicar  for  his  answers,  "  As  for 
killing  of  Hares  upon  ye  Lord's  Day  he  denys  it;  he 
owns  that  he  and  his  clerk  were  going  along  once  ;  a 
hare  started  up  before  them  and  he  clapd  his  clerk  upon 
ye  back  and  said,  '  There  she  goes.'  " 

Nothing  can  give  a  greater  idea  of  the  careful, 
thorough,  scholarly  man  Wake  was  than  the  papers 
still  extant  dealing  with  a  case  of  one  of  his  clergy.  He 

had  married  Mary  K          and  had  several  children  by 

her.    She  died  in  1680,  and  in  1682  he  married  Dorothy 

K  ,  her  sister.    There  is  in  Wake's  own  hand  first 

of  all  a  sheet  containing  a  note  of  the  facts,  specifying 
the  witnesses  to  each  material  allegation  of  fact,  and 
also  rough  heads  of  the  points  to  be  dealt  with  by  the 
judgment.  Then  there  is  a  draft,  carefully  corrected 
and  settled,  of  the  judgment  to  be  pronounced,  with 
elaborate  notes  of  the  statutes,  the  canons,  and  authori- 
ties, all  in  Wake's  own  hand.  "  Suppose  him  married 
yt  does  not  excuse,  rather  in  some  respects  it  aggravates, 
the  offence  :  it  adds  profanation  of  ye  Holy  Ordinance 
of  Matrimony  to  ye  ends  of  a  most  unwarrantable 
incontinency."  "  Canon  prohibit  :  maxime  vero  siquis 
priore  uxore  demortua  ejus  sororem  uxorem  duxerit." 

Wake's  action  in  Parliament  while  Bishop  of  Lincoln 
was  on  at  least  two  occasions  worthy  of  particular 
note.  The  first  and  by  far  the  most  important  was 
his  support  of  the  Ministry  in  their  attempt — ill-advised 
as  it  ultimately  proved — to  impeach  the  notorious  Dr, 
Sacheverell.    The  Ministers,  who  initiated  the  attack  on 


26 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


the  Doctor,  were  Whigs.  In  1 703  and  1 704  Marlborough, 
who  was  interested  in  nothing  but  carrying  on  the  war 
with  and  winning  his  splendid  victories  over  Louis  xiv. 
and  the  French,  had  got  rid  of  the  High  Tories  Rochester 
and  Nottingham.  Harley  and  St.  John  came  in,  their 
Toryism  being  sufficiently  mild  to  enable  them  to 
serve  with  Godolphin  and  Marlborough.  In  1705 
Nottingham  and  the  High  Tories  had  raised  the  cry 
of  the  "  Church  in  Danger,"  but  without  any  marked 
success,  the  debate  in  Parliament  ending  in 
Rochester's  motion  to  this  effect  being  lost.  The 
Parliament  of  1705  was  more  Whig  than  its  predecessor, 
and  gradually  by  the  end  of  1709  a  set  of  Whig 
Ministers,  Marlborough,  Sunderland  (his  son-in-law), 
Godolphin,  Somers,  and  Wharton  were  in  power. 

Meanwhile  what  of  the  clergy.  Twenty  years  had 
passed  since  the  Revolution.  There  were  various 
causes  which  had  tended  to  weaken  the  Jacobite 
sympathies  which  the  clergy  had  shown  during  the 
first  half  of  this  period.  Anne  was  a  devoted  Church- 
woman  :  James  11.  was  dead  ;  the  cause  of  the  Pre- 
tender was  espoused  by  Louis  of  France,  with  whom 
England  had  fought,  was  fighting,  and  was  likely  to 
fight.  There  were  plottings  ;  but  they  were  not  so 
serious  as  when  in  1671  so  good  a  man  as  Turner, 
Bishop  of  Ely — Ken's  schoolfellow  and  intimate  friend — 
had  narrowly  escaped  with  his  life — only,  in  fact,  because 
of  William's  freedom  from  vindictiveness — for  plotting 
to  bring  over  Louis  and  a  French  army  to  set  up  James 
again  ;  or,  as  in  1696;  when  Collier  and  Snatt,  non-juring 
clergymen,  gave  public  absolution  to  Friend  and  Perkins, 
executed  for  plotting  Williams'  assassination. 

But  though  willing  to  accept  the  Hanoverian 
Settlement,  the  bulk  of  the  clergy  were  not  disposed 
to  show  any  consideration  to  the  Dissenters.  The 
Toleration  Act  they  grudgingly  accepted  :  but  thus 
far  and  no  further  ;  they  were  the  backbone  of  the 
High  Tory  party  which  year  after  year  passed  in  the 


1737] 


SACHEVERELL 


27 


Commons  the  Act  to  punish  occasional  Conformity. 
Of  comprehension  they  would  have  nothing,  and  the 
repeal  of  the  Test  Act  was  almost  too  horrible  to  be 
thought  of. 

And  yet  the  Whigs  were  bound  to  help  the  Dis- 
senters. So  it  was  resolved  to  take  a  step  ;  and  that 
step  was  to  impeach  Sacheverell. 

Of  course  the  impeachment  was  a  failure.  Somers, 
perhaps  the  most  level-headed  of  the  Ministers,  was 
against  it.  Public  sympathy  was  soon  against  it. 
Sacheverell's  sermon  was  sold  to  the  number  of  40,000 
copies  in  a  few  days.  He,  with  but  a  sorry  stock 
of  deserts,  became  a  popular  hero.  Why  was  this? 
Granted  that  the  country  clergy  would  like  the  flavour 
of  Sacheverell's  doctrine,  why  the  man  in  the  street? 
Probably  the  heavy  taxation  for  the  war,  and  the 
fierce  attacks  of  the  Tory  preachers  had  some  part 
in  this  result.  But  the  fact  seemed  to  be  Sacheverell 
had  attacked  the  Dissenters.  By  attacking  him, 
Ministers  took  up  a  brief  for  them.  Though  the  man 
in  the  street  felt  no  sympathy  for  the  clergy  in  their 
leanings  to  Jacobitism  or  even  nonjuring,  in  their 
dislike  for  Dissenters  he  was  with  them.  The  Dis- 
senters having  got  Toleration,  had  got  quite  enough. 
Now  to  the  story  itself. 

Dr.  Henry  Sacheverell  was  a  Fellow  of  Magdalen 
College,  Oxford,  and  Chaplain  of  St.  Saviour's,  South- 
wark.  He  was  and  had  long  been  a  pillar  of  High 
Toryism.  He  was  not  a  man  of  great  intellect,  but 
he  was  big  in  voice  as  he  was  in  person,  and  his  power 
of  invective  was  considerable.  He  had  preached  the 
Assize  Sermon  at  Derby,  in  the  summer  of  1709,  and 
on  the  5th  November  he  preached  before  the  Lord 
Mayor  and  Aldermen.  His  text  was  "  In  perils  among 
false  brethren,"  2  Cor.  xi.  26.  The  main  points  of 
the  sermon  were  the  duty  of  absolute  non-resistance ; 
the  sin  of  dissent  from  the  Church  :  the  evil  of  schemes 
for  Toleration   and  Comprehension.    In  its  language 


28 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


it  was  highly  seasoned.  "  The  grand  security  of  our 
Government,  and  the  very  pillar  upon  which  it  stands, 
is  founded  upon  the  steady  belief  of  the  subjects  of 
obligation  to  an  absolute  and  unconditional  obedience 
to  the  Supreme  Power  in  all  things  lawful,  and  the 
utter  illegality  of  Resistance  upon  any  pretence  what- 
ever." Ministers  were  styled  the  false  brethren, 
putting  the  Church  in  peril — "  who,"  said  the  preacher, 
"  let  her  worst  enemies  into  her  bowels  under  the 
holy  umbrage  of  sons  who  neither  believe  her  faith, 
own  her  mission,  submit  to  her  discipline,  nor  comply 
with  her  Liturgy.  To  admit  this  Religious  Trojan 
Horse,  big  with  arms  and  ruin  into  our  Holy  City, 
the  strait  gate  must  be  laid  quite  open,  her  walls  and 
inclosures  pulled  down,  an  high  road  made  in  and 
upon  her  Communion  and  the  pure  spouse  of  Christ 
prostituted  to  more  adulterers  than  the  scarlet  whore 
in  the  Revelation.  Since  this  model  of  a  universal 
liberty  and  coalition  failed,  and  these  false  brethren 
could  not  carry  the  conventicle  into  the  Church,  they 
are  now  resolved  to  bring  the  Church  into  the  con- 
venticle, which  will  more  probably  really  effect  her 
ruin." 

Ministers  were  even  more  pointedly  struck  at.  "If 
upon  all  occasions  to  comply  with  the  Dissenters,  both 
in  public  and  private  affairs  as  persons  of  tender 
conscience  and  piety;  to  promote  their  interests  in 
Elections,  to  sneak  to  'em  for  Places  and  Preferment, 
to  defend  Toleration  and  Liberty  of  conscience,  and 
under  the  pretence  of  Moderation  to  excuse  their 
separation  and  lay  the  fault  upon  the  true  sons  of  the 
Church  for  carrying  matters  too  high,  ...  if  these,  I 
say,  are  the  modish  and  fashionable  criteria  of  a  True 
Churchman,  God  deliver  us  from  all  such  false  brethren." 
In  another  passage  he  reviled  the  Statesmen  who 
sought  or  even  accepted  the  support  of  Dissenters, 
inveighing  against  "the  crafty  insidiousness  of  such 
modern  Volpones." 


1737] 


SACHEVERELL 


29 


This  was  the  last  straw.  Volpone  was  a  con- 
temptible character  in  Ben  Jonson's  play  of  the 
Fox.  Godolphin  thought  he  was  hit  at  under  this 
name,  and  was  furious.  So  on  13th  December,  Mr. 
Dolben,  member  for  Liskeard,  whose  father  had  been 
Archbishop  of  York,  made  a  complaint  in  the  Commons 
of  the  two  sermons,  extracts  from  which  were  read. 
They  were  resolved  to  be  seditious  libels.  Sacheverell 
and  the  printer  attended,  and  after  the  discussion  the 
Doctor's  Impeachment  by  the  Commons  at  the  Bar 
of  the  Lords  was  ordered.  The  usual  lengthy  pro- 
ceedings of  Articles  of  Impeachment;  Answer,  and 
Replication  were  gone  through.  Counsel  were  assigned 
to  the  accused,  Sir  Simon  Harcourt  and  Mr.  Phipps, 
who  were  assisted  by  Atterbury,  Smallridge,  and 
Friend  as  divines.  Ultimately  the  trial  began  on 
Monday,  27th  February,  in  the  presence  of  a  huge 
concourse.  The  Doctor  was  attended  by  a  cheering 
crowd  from  his  lodgings  in  the  Temple  to  Westminster 
Hall.  The  Managers  of  the  trial  on  behalf  of  the 
Commons  were  Sir  Joseph  Jekyll,  Eyre  Solicitor- 
General,  Sir  Peter  King  the  Recorder,  Lieut  .-General 
Stanhope  afterwards  Lord  Stanhope,  Sir  Thomas 
Parker,  and  Walpole.  They  presented  four  Articles  of 
Impeachment,^  charging  the  Doctor — 

1.  With  asserting  that  the  means  used  to  bring 

about  the  Revolution  were  odious  and  un- 
justifiable. 

2.  With   condemning  the  Toleration  granted  by 

law. 

3.  With  asserting  that  the  Church  was  in  danger. 

4.  With  maliciously  asserting  that  her  Majesty's 

present  advisers  were  false  brethren  and 
traitors  to  the  constitution  in  Church  and 
State. 

The  Managers  were  four  days  in  opening  their  case  ; 

'  Smollett's  Hist,  of  Eng.,  x.  35. 


30 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


then  came  Counsel  for  the  accused,  the  defence  winding 
up  with  a  speech  by  Sacheverell,  said  to  have  been 
written  by  Atterbury. 

On  1 6th  March  the  Lords  took  into  consideration 
whether  the  Commons  had  estabhshed  their  articles. 
The  second  article  was  the  one  which  it  was  Wake's 
lot  to  deal  with,  and  it  raised  the  whole  question  of 
Toleration,  and  incidentally  of  Comprehension.  The 
article  itself  was  in  the  following  terms.  It  said  that 
in  his  St.  Paul's  sermon  Dr.  Sacheverell  asserted  and 
maintained  that  the  toleration  granted  by  law  is 
unreasonable  and  the  allowance  of  it  unwarrantable, 
and  asserted  that  he  is  a  false  brother  with  relation 
to  God,  religion,  and  the  Church  who  defends  toleration 
or  liberty  of  conscience  :  that  Queen  Elizabeth  was 
deluded  by  Archbishop  Grindal,  whom  he  scurrilously 
called  "  a  false  son  of  the  Church,  and  a  perfidious 
apostate  "  to  the  toleration  of  the  Genevan  discipline, 
and  that  it  is  the  duty  of  superior  pastors  to  thunder 
out  their  ecclesiastical  anathemas  against  persons 
entitled  to  the  benefit  of  the  said  toleration  and 
insolently  dares  or  defies  any  powers  on  earth  to  reverse 
such  sentence." 

It  is  perhaps  amusing  to  note  that  in  his  answer  to 
the  second  article  the  Doctor,  as  to  so  much  of  the 
second  Article  as  referred  to  Elizabeth  and  Archbishop 
Grindal,  "  presumed  that  no  words  spoken  of  an  arch- 
bishop above  one  hundred  and  twenty  years  since 
deceased  will  in  construction  of  law  amount  to  a  high 
crime  and  misdemeanour." 

This  article  Wake  opened  on  the  17th  March  in  a 
long  and  able  speech  which  has  always  been  considered 
of  especial  interest  as  giving  for  the  first  time  a  detailed 
account  of  the  efforts  for  Comprehension  made  by  and 
under  Sancroft. 

Wake  began  by  repudiating  the  idea  that  in  defend- 
ing toleration  shown  by  law  to  Dissenters,  bishops  were 
"  apostates  to  their  own  order."    He  then  refers  to  the 


1737]  WAKE'S  SPEECH  ON  COMPREHENSION  31 


article,  and  says  that  he  thinks  "  the  Managers  have 
fully  made  it  out  "  not  by  implication  or  piecing  together 
disjointed  passages,  but  "by  the  plain  words  and 
necessary  meaning  of  a  large  part  of  the  Discourse."  He 
then  asks  leave  to  point  out  what  a  strange  account  the 
preacher  had  given  of  "  that  other  popular  engine 
which  he  says  has  been  made  use  of  to  pull  down  the 
Church  and  which  he  calls  by  the  name  of  Comprehen- 
sion." Then  comes  the  passage  about  Sancroft,  which 
is  in  the  following  words  : 

"  The  person  who  first  concerted  this  supposed 
design  against  our  Church  was  the  late  most  reverend 
Dr.  Sancroft,  then  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  The 
time  was  towards  the  end  of  that  unhappy  reign  of 
which  so  much  was  said  upon  the  occasion  of  the  fore- 
going article.  Then  when  we  were  in  the  height  of 
our  labours  defending  the  Church  of  England  against 
the  assaults  of  popery  and  thought  of  nothing  else, 
that  wise  prelate,  foreseeing  some  such  revolution  as 
soon  after  was  happily  brought  about,  began  to  consider 
how  utterly  unprepared  they  had  been  at  the  restoration 
of  King  Charles  the  Second  to  settle  many  things  to 
the  advantage  of  the  Church  and  what  a  happy  oppor- 
tunity had  been  lost  for  want  of  such  a  previous  care 
as  he  was  therefore  desirous  should  now  be  taken  for  the 
better  and  more  perfect  establishment  of  it.  It  was 
visible  to  all  the  nation  that  the  more  moderate  dis- 
senters were  generally  so  well  satisfied  with  that  stand 
which  our  divines  had  made  against  popery  and  the 
many  unanswerable  treatises  they  had  published  in 
confutation  of  it  as  to  express  an  unusual  readiness  to 
come  in  to  us.  And  it  was  therefore  thought  worth 
the  while  when  they  were  deliberating  about  those  other 
matters  to  consider  at  the  same  time  what  might  be 
done  to  gain  them  without  doing  any  prejudice  to  our- 
selves. The  scheme  was  laid  out,  and  the  several  parts 
of  it  were  committed  not  only*  with  the  approbation 
but  by  the  direction  of  that  great  prelate  to  such  of  our 
divines  as  were  thought  the  most  proper  to  be  entrusted 
with  it. 

"  His  grace  took  one  part  to  himself.  Another  was 
committed  to  a  then  pious  and  reverend  dean,  after- 
wards a  bishop  of  our  Church  (Dr.  Patrick,  Bishop  of 


32 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Ely).  The  reviewing  of  the  daily  service  of  our  Liturgy 
and  the  Communion  book  was  referred  to  a  select  number 
of  excellent  persons,  two  of  which  are  at  this  time  upon 
our  bench  (the  Archbishop  of  York  and  Bishop  of  Ely), 
and  I  am  sure  will  bear  witness  to  the  truth  of  my 
relation.  The  design  was  in  short  this  :  to  improve  and, 
if  possible,  to  enforce  our  discipline  ;  to  review  and 
enlarge  our  Liturgy;  by  correcting  of  some  things,  by 
adding  of  others  ;  and  if  it  should  be  thought  advisable 
by  authority  when  this  matter  should  come  to  be  legally 
considered,  first  in  convocation,  then  in  parliament,  by 
leaving  some  few  ceremonies  confessed  to  be  indifferent 
in  their  natures  as  indifferent  in  their  usage  so  as  not 
to  be  necessarily  observed  by  those  who  made  a  scruple 
of  them ;  until  they  should  be  able  to  overcome  either 
their  weaknesses  or  prejudices  and  be  willing  to  comply 
with  them." 

What,  the  speaker  goes  on  to  ask,  was  there  in  such 
a  design  that  was  prejudicial  to  our  Church?  "  How 
would  our  excellent  Liturgy  have  been  the  worse  if  a  few 
more  doubtful  expressions  had  been  made  plainer  or 
clearer  and  a  passage  or  two  which,  however  capable  of 
a  just  defence,  yet,  in  many  cases,  seem  hard  even  to 
members  of  our  own  Communion,  had  either  been 
wholly  left  at  liberty  in  such  cases  to  be  omitted  alto- 
gether or  been  so  qualified  as  to  remove  all  exception 
against  them  in  any  case."  Even  under  William  and 
Mary  any  scheme  for  Comprehension  was  submitted 
to  the  two  Convocations. 

Wake  then  goes  through  the  sermon  and  calls 
attention  to  such  phrases  as  Ecclesiastical  Ahitophels 
which  the  preacher  had  used.  And  the  Toleration 
complained  of  was  the  Toleration  of  Dissenters — not  of 
Atheists,  Deists,  Socinians  ;  men  of  no  principles, 
perhaps  of  no  religion.  Wake  quotes  copiously  from 
the  sermon,  and  moves  that  the  second  article  had  been 
proved. 

There  was  a  long  and  confused  wrangle  how  the 
questions  at  issue  were  to  be  voted  on  or  determined 
by  the  House.    It  at  last  determined  that  the  answer 


1737]         VERDICT  AND  SENTENCE  35 


to  be  given  by  each  Lord  should  be '  guilty '  or '  not  guilty  ' 
only.  Against  the  protest  of  thirty-four  Lords,  the 
question  put  was,  "  Is  Henry  Sacheverell,  D.D.,  guilty 
of  high  crimes  and  misdemeanour  charged  upon  him 
by  the  Impeachment  of  the  House  of  Commons  ?  " 
Sixty-nine  voted  guilty,  and  fifty-two  not  guilt3^  The 
bishops  were  almost  equally  divided,  Chester,  Bath 
and  Wells,  Rochester,  London  and  Durham,  and  the 
Archbishop  of  York  voting  not  guilty  ;  seven,  including 
Wake,  voting  guilty. 

After  a  day's  adjournment  the  House  considered 
the  sentence  to  be  passed.  It  was  first  proposed  that 
he  should  be  enjoined  from  preaching  for  seven  years. 
This  was  carried,  three  being  substituted  for  seven. 

It  was  next  proposed  that  he  should  be  made  incap- 
able of  receiving  any  other  ecclesiastical  benefice  for 
three  years.  This  was  negatived.  A  proposal  that  the 
Doctor  should  be  imprisoned  in  the  Tower  for  three 
months  and  until  he  find  sureties  for  good  behaviour 
was  dropped.  Finally  it  was  carried  that  his  two 
sermons  should  be  burned  by  the  Common  Hangman 
at  the  Royal  Exchange.  It  is  not  surprising  that  the 
comment  of  some  contemporary  writers  on  the  whole 
trial  should  be  Parturiunt  monies. 

The  second  occasion  to  be  noted  of  Wake's  parlia- 
mentary conduct  as  Bishop  of  Lincoln  is  over  Boling- 
broke's  Schism  Bill  in  1714. 

During  Anne's  last  days  she  was  in  the  hands,  as  we 
have  noted,  first  of  Oxford  and  Bolingbroke,  and  after- 
wards of  Bolingbroke  alone.  It  was  part  of  the  policy 
of  these  Tory  Ministers  to  weaken  the  Whigs  by  re- 
pressive legislation  so  as  to  compel  the  new  Hanoverian 
sovereign,  Whig  though  he  was  known  to  be,  to  employ 
Tory  Ministers. 

Introduced  into  the  Commons  by  the  celebrated 
Tory,  Sir  William  Wyndham,  in  May  1714  the  Schism 
Bill  got  through  the  House  in  spite  of  much  opposition. 
It  forbade  any  one  keeping  a  school  without  a  licence 


34 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


from  the  bishop.  In  fact,  through  Queen  Anne's  death 
the  Act  never  came  into  actual  operation. 

Wake  opposed  the  Bill,  and  seems  to  have  been 
keenly  interested  in  the  opposition,  which  is  the  more 
surprising  as  a  few  years  later  he  opposed  the  repeal 
of  the  Act.  He  made  a  note  in  his  own  writing  of  the 
proceedings  in  the  Lords  on  the  15th  June  1914.  It  is 
headed  : 

"  The  question  was  put  whether  the  Bill  with  the 
amendment  should  pass.  Resolved  in  the  affirmative,  viz. 
"  79  affirm.,  71  neg." 

Wake  either  drafted  or  copied  out  the  protest 
against  the  Bill  in  eight  clauses.    Number  3  says  : 

"  If  neverthelesse  the  Dissenters  were  dangerous, 
Severity  is  not  so  proper  and  effectual  a  method  to 
reduce  them  to  the  Church  as  Charitable  Indulgence  ; 
as  is  manifest  by  experience,  there  having  been  more 
Dissenters  reconciled  to  the  Church  since  the  Act  of 
Toleration  than  in  all  the  time  since  the  Act  of  Uni- 
formity to  the  time  of  the  first  Act  of  Toleration,  and 
there  is  scarce  one  considerable  family  in  England  in 
Communion  with  the  Dissenters.  Severity  may  make 
them  hypocrites  but  not  converts." 

In  March  171 2  we  find  Samuel  Wesley  again  writing 
to  Wake.  As  to  five  points  in  the  bishop's  letter  to  his 
clergy,  Wesley  says  :  "  I've  neither  sufficient  presence 
of  mind  nor  readiness  of  expression  personally  to  dis- 
course these  matters  as  I  ought  with  your  Lordship." 
As  to  one  point,  he  says  : 

"  I  read  Public  Prayers  on  Litany  Days  and  on 
Sundays  and  Holy  Days,  but  not  on  their  eves,  for  which 
I  have  no  better  excuse  than  the  old  one,  Want  of  Com- 
pany. My  children  are  small,  my  House  far  from  ye 
Church,  the  way  in  winter  almost  impassable." 

He  begs  Wake  to  visit  and  confirm  at  the  Isle  of 
Oxholm  in  Wesley's  parish.    He  says  : 

"  'Tis  very  populous  for  its  extent  of  ground  and 


1737]       MAINTENANCE  OF  BUCKDEN  35 


consists,  I  think,  of  about  10,000  souls.  It  is  impossible 
for  us  to  get  any  number  of  our  people  over  the  Trent 
(unless  it  be  at  an  election).  I  had  but  a  very  few  at 
the  last  Confirmcon.  I  don't  expect  I  can  persuade 
the  loth  part  of  my  people  who  need  it  and  are  other- 
wise fit  for  it  to  take  the  journey.  Most  of  'em  are  poor 
and  must  be  forc'd  to  foot  it.  .  .  .  They  seem  to  beseech 
your  Lordship  to  come  over  into  Macedonia  and  help 
them.  If  your  Lordship  is  not  for  returning  to  Gains- 
boro'  at  night  I  believe  there  are  some  gentlemen  in  the 
Isle  who  wou'd  take  it  as  a  great  honour  to  entertain  an 
Angel  in  their  houses — tho'  not  unawares."  Samuel 
Wesley  had  before  this  been  elected  a  Proctor  in  Con- 
vocation. 

Wake  is  said  to  have  behaved  liberally  in  the  main- 
tenance and  repair  of  the  houses  and  buildings  belong- 
ing to  the  Episcopal  and  other  offices  he  held,  and  it  is 
recorded  that :  "  Budgen,  the  seat  of  the  Bishops  of 
Lincoln,  can  boast  that  the  Episcopal  house  was  never 
so  well  repaired  and  decently  fitted  up  as  while  His 
Grace  was  the  watchful  overseer  of  the  diocese."  ^ 
When  Wake  became  archbishop  he  was  succeeded  at 
Lincoln  by  Dr.  Gibson,  who  had  been  Archbishop 
Tenison's  resident  Chaplain  at  Lambeth.  There  is  a 
letter  from  him  to  Wake,  dated  the  28th  July  1716, 
written  after  Gibson  had  been  appointed  Wake's  suc- 
cessor at  Lincoln,  and  after  Gibson  and  his  wife  had 
paid  a  visit  of  inspection  to  the  palace  at  Buckden 
belonging  to  the  bishops  of  Lincoln.  He  reports  "we 
found  the  house  and  gardens  in  complete  repair."  So 
satisfactory  was  the  inspection  of  the  house  at  Buckden, 
that  Gibson  says  of  it :  "  We  had  much  adoe  to  keep  our 
servants  from  saying  one  to  another  that  it  is  a  more 
desirable  dwelling  than  Lambeth  House." 

Wake  had  a  good  deal  to  do  with  the  finishing  of 
St.  Paul's  Cathedral.  The  Act  of  Parliament  had 
confided  the  charge  of  this  work  to  a  body  of  Com- 
missioners.   As  the  Cathedral  approached  completion 

*  See  Mill's  Essay  on  Generosity  and  Public  Spirit,  dedicated  to  Wake. 


36 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


suggestions  were  freely  made  that  there  had  been  frauds 
on  the  Commissioners  in  the  course  of  the  operations. 
Even  the  great  Wren  was  said  to  have  misconducted 
himself. 1  A  sub-committee  to  whom  the  Commis- 
sioners delegated  the  task  of  examining  into  these 
charges  made  their  report,  dated  the  28th  June  171 5. 
The  Report  said  they  had  reason  to  complain  of  Wren 
as  "  obstructing  the  business  of  the  Church  "  and 
"  suffering  by  a  very  faulty  neglect  great  frauds  and 
abuses  to  be  committed,"  yet  considering  his  great  age 
and  the  reputation  he  has  been  so  long  possessed  of 
they  were  desirous  to  "  spare  his  name,"  but  made 
grave  charges  of  corruption  and  incompetence  against 
Bateman,  his  assistant  surveyor.  Informations  were 
framed  against  the  latter,  who  put  in  an  answer  to 
them.  These,  with  the  sub-committee's  reply,  were 
delivered  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  who  was  desired  to 
lay  them  before  his  Grace  of  Canterbury. 

Wake  preserved  among  his  papers  a  very  interest- 
ing memorial  by  Sir  Christopher  Wren,  relating  to  the 
adorning  of  the  new  St.  Paul's  Cathedral.  The  Com- 
missioners had  passed  a  Resolution  that  a  "  Balustrade 
of  Stone  be  set  up  on  the  Top  of  the  Church  "  unless 
Wren  certified  within  a  fortnight  that  it  was  contrary 
to  the  principles  of  architecture.  Wren  said  :  "I 
never  designed  a  Balustrade.  Persons  of  little  skill  in 
architecture  did  expect,  I  believe,  to  see  something  they 
had  been  used  to  in  Gothic  structures,  and  Ladys  think 
nothing  well  without  an  edging.  A  Balustrade  is 
suppos'd  a  sort  of  plinth  above  the  upper  Colonade.  .  .  . 
In  the  inward  angles,  where  the  Pilasters  cannot  be 
doubled  as  before  they  were,  the  two  voids  or  open 
spaces  would  meet  in  the  angle  with  one  small  Pilaster 
between  and  create  a  very  disagreeable  mixture.  .  .  . 
There  is  already  over  the  Entablature  a  proper  Plinth 
which  regularly  terminates  the  whole  building,  and  as 
no  provision  was  originally  made  in  my  plan  for  a 

I  See  Wake  MSS. 


1737]    SUCCEEDS  TENISON  AS  PRIMATE  37 


Balustrade  the  setting  up  of  one  in  such  a  confus'd 
manner  over  the  Phnth  must  apparently  break  with 
the  Harmony  of  the  whole  machine  and  in  this  case  be 
contrary  to  the  Principles  of  Architecture.  .  .  .  My 
opinion  therefore  is  to  have  Statues  erected  on  the  four 
Pediements  onl}'  which  will  be  a  most  proper  Noble 
and  sufficient  ornament  to  the  whole  Fabric  and  was 
never  omitted  in  the  best  Antient  Greek  and  Roman 
Architecture.  ...  If  I  glory  it  is  in  the  singular  mercy 
of  God  who  has  enabled  me  to  begin  and  finish  my  great 
work  so  conformable  to  the  Antient  Model." 

Wake  was  throughout  a  supporter  of  the  Hanoverian 
Succession.  George  i.  arrived  in  London  on  the  i6th 
September  1714,  and  in  October  following  the  Bishop, 
Dean  and  Chapter,  and  Clergy  of  Lincoln  presented 
their  address  to  His  Majesty,  in  which  they  state  "  our 
prayers  are  now  answer 'd,  and  we  trust  in  God  yt 
our  Deliverance  from  Popery  and  Slavery  so  happily 
begun  by  yr  Glorious  Predecessor  King  William  is  now 
compleated." 

It  was  widely  thought,  even  before  Dr.  Tenison's 
death,  that  Wake  would  be  Tenison's  successor.  On 
15th  May  1715,  Gibson  writes  to  Wake  : 

"  I  was  asked  by  a  brother  Presbyter,  who  is  often 
with  my  Lord  Townshend,  what  I  thought  of  Dr. 
Bradford  for  Lincoln  on  supposition  of  your  Lordship's 
being  translated,  which  he  took  for  granted." 

Apparently  Gibson  thought  Bradford,  who  was  after- 
wards made  Bishop  of  Carlisle  in  1719  and  of  Rochester 
in  1723,  a  sorry  successor  to  "  a  perfect  master  of  the 
work  "  like  Wake.  He  adds:  "  His  Grace  found  him- 
self much  worse  yesterday  by  sitting  up  soe  long  the 
day  before,  and  my  account  from  ye  Palace  this  morn- 
ing is  that  he  has  had  an  ill  night  and  is  much  out  of 
order." 

Tenison  died  on  the  24th  December  171 5.  It  is 
said  that  the  Primacy  was  offered  to  Hough,  Bishop  of 


38 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Lichfield.  Hough  was  the  man  who  had  been  elected 
President  of  Magdalen  by  the  Fellows  on  their  rejection 
of  Anthony  Farmer,  James  the  Second's  nominee,  and 
who  was  afterwards  turned  out  of  the  Headship  of  the 
College  in  favour  of  Parker,  Bishop  of  Oxford,  by  James 
the  Second's  Special  Commission.  Hough  has  been 
called  an  "ideal  bishop," ^  but  he  shrunk  from  being 
Primate  from  modesty.  Tenison  had  recommended 
Wake,  and  he  was  appointed,  his  appointment  being 
confirmed  on  6th  January  17 16.  Wake  was  succeeded 
at  Lincoln  by  Gibson,  then  Archdeacon  of  Surrey,  who 
had  been  chaplain  to,  and  was  high  in  the  esteem  of, 
Archbishop  Tenison,  and  who  in  1720  was  translated  to 
London. 

Wake  was  sworn  in  as  member  of  the  Privy  Council 
on  20th  January  17 16,  his  election  by  the  Dean  and 
Chapter  having  taken  place,  and  been  duly  published 
after  morning  service  on  the  5th. 

He  was  widely  congratulated  on  his  accession  to 
the  Primacy.  His  colleagues  at  York,  Bath  and  Wells, 
Chichester,  Ely,  Llandaff,  and,  of  course,  Carlisle  wrote 
congratulatory  letters.  Jno.  Oxon  (afterwards  to  be 
Archbishop  Potter,  his  successor  in  the  Primacy)  writes 
to  a  like  effect  and  says  :  "  The  voice  of  the  world  hath 
already  long  since  appointed  your  Lordship  for  his 
(Tenison's)  successor."  Chaslett,  Master  of  University, 
who  had  urged  him  to  accept  Lincoln,  congratulates 
him  on  Canterbury.  Edward  Tenison  writes  :  "  If  your 
old  friend  that  is  dead  had  been  indulg'd  so  far  as  to 
name  a  successor  he  would  undoubtedly  have  named 
your  Lordship."  An  old  schoolfellow  (we  suppose  at 
Wakefield)  sent  him  acrostics  on  his  name  in  Latin  and 
in  English.    We  quote  the  English  : 

"When  numerous  blossoms  in  the  Spring  appear. 
It  commonly  portends  a  fruitf ull  year  ; 
Like  which  Wake's  virtues,  while  but  in  their  bloom. 
Left  hopes  of  fruits  of  a  good  Life  to  come. 


'  Lord  Lyttelton  in  Worcester  Dioc.  Hist.,  p.  334.    See  Hore,  i.  316. 


1737]  THE  NEW  ARCHBISHOP 


39 


Illustrious  George,  who  does  with  Justice  scan 
All  men's  deserts  well  knowing  this  good  man. 
Made  him  the  Church's  Metropolitan. 
What,  then,  may  England  hope  from  such  a  choice, 
A  man  approv'd  by  every  good  man's  voice. 
Known  a  Defender  of  the  Sacred  Truth, 
Exemplary  in  Life,  even  from  his  Youth." 

Lord  Chancellor  Cowper  wishes  his  confirmation 
hastened  on,  and  will  not  "  think  of  being  out  of  town 
should  his  presence  for  the  ceremony  be  necessary." 

With  Gibson  Wake  was  now  in  frequent  correspond- 
ence. He  writes  to  the  archbishop  as  to  the  necessity  of 
an  entertainment  to  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  Canter- 
bury, whether  the  enthronisation  is  in  person  or  by 
proxy  ;  he  makes  an  "  arrangement  "  as  to  the  services 
and  remuneration  of  the  gardener  for  the  garden  at 
Lambeth,  which  he  tells  Wake  covers  six  acres  :  he  has 
to  recommend  when  the  weekly  doles  to  the  poor  at 
my  lord's  gate  should  begin,  whether  before  he  "  comes 
over  "  or  then,  and  gives  the  two  last  precedents. 

"  Tillotson  appointed  i  May.    Dole  begun  i  October. 
Tenison  translated  1 6  Jany.     ,,       ,,     i  April." 

Somehow  Tenison  had  let  serious  dilapidations  to 
occur  both  at  Lambeth  and  Croydon,  and  the  settlement 
of  these  with  his  nephew,  Edward  Tenison,  involved 
friction  if  not  litigation.  The  following  particulars  are 
given  in  the  notes  to  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  vx..  322, 
as  taken  from  Dr.  Edward  Tenison's  letters  on  Wake's 
demand  for  dilapidations.  Archbishop  Tenison  laid  out 
above  ;^2000  at  Croydon.  £200  a  year  was  the  least  he 
laid  out  in  repairs.  "  Disbursements  for  repairs  in  about 
seventeen  years  besides  what  was  paid  by  his  Grace 
himself,  ;^342i,  12s." 

Wake  asked  for  dilapidations,  1^3469.  The  claim  was 
referred  to  Lord  Chief-Justice  King  and  Dr.  Bettesworth, 
Dean  of  the  Arches ,  as  arbitrators ,  with  t  he  Bishop  of  Lich- 
field as  umpire.    The  arbitrators  awarded  Wake  £2800. 

In  the  latter  months  of  1715  all  England  was  con- 
4 


40 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


cerned  with  the  Earl  of  Mar's  rising  in  the  North  on 
behalf  of  the  Pretender.  The  rebellion  is  perhaps  best 
known  to  the  ordinary  British  reader  by  the  handsome 
Earl  of  Derwentwater  being  beheaded  for  his  part  in  it, 
and  by  Lord  Nithsdale  escaping  a  like  fate  by  the  aid  of 
his  wife's  suit  of  women's  clothes.  Forster,  a  gentleman 
of  Northumberland,  was  at  the  head  of  the  English  in- 
surgents. According  to  Smollett,  there  was  a  difference 
between  the  Pretender's  Generals  at  Kelso  in  October — 
Lord  Wintoun  and  the  Highlanders  wishing  to  march 
into  West  Scotland,  the  Englishmen  to  cross  the  Tweed 
and  attack  the  King's  forces.  About  half  of  them  did 
march  under  Forster  to  Penrith,  where,  says  Smollett, 
"  the  Sheriff,  assisted  by  the  Lord  Lonsdale  and  the 
Bishop  of  Carlisle,  had  assembled  the  whole  posse 
comitatus  of  Cumberland,  who  dispersed  with  the  utmost 
precipitation  at  the  approach  of  the  Rebels."  Forster 
and  his  forces  got  to  Preston,  where  he  was  attacked  by 
and  surrendered  to  General  Wills.  On  the  same  day, 
14th  November,  Mar  was  defeated  at  Dunblane,  and 
the  rebellion  died  out.  Wake  was  far  from  the  fray,  but 
the  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  William  Nicholson,  who  had  had 
the  See  since  1698,  was  a  Hanoverian  though  a  strong 
Churchman.  He  was  a  personal  friend  of  Wake's,  and 
seems  to  have  placed  great  reliance  on  the  archbishop. 
There  are  multitudes  of  letters  from  Rose  Castle  to  Wake 
among  the  Wake  MSS  ;  some  of  them  dated  from  Rose, 
even  after  the  spirited  old  bishop,  who  had  complained 
to  Wake  of  the  expense  of  his  large  family,  had  been  con- 
soled with  the  lucrative  Bishopric  of  Derry.  He  ended 
his  days  as  Archbishop  of  Cashel. 

We  get  a  vivid  picture  of  the  position  at  Carlisle  in 
a  letter  dated  the  very  day  before  the  surrender  of  the 
rebels  at  Preston  and  the  battle  of  Dunblane  : 

"  Rose,  November  14th,  171 5. 

"  My  very  good  Lord, — Your  Lordship's  kindness 
is  very  particular  in  expressing  so  great  a  concern  for 


1737] 


MAR'S  REBELLION 


41 


the  safety  of  so  insignificant  a  creature  as  I  am.  The 
Rebels  had  indeed  once  fully  purpos'd  (as  they  acknow- 
ledg'd  at  Penrith)  to  have  given  me  a  visit ;  and  to  that 
end  hover'd  the  whole  day  on  the  Banks  of  ye  River  Eden 
five  miles  below  Carlisle.  But  as  Providence  ordered 
the  matter  the  Rains  had  then  so  swell'd  the  waters  that 
they  were  not  fordable.  This  preserv'd  my  Beef  and 
Mutton  for  the  present.  They  sent  me  word  that  these 
provisions  were  only  kept  in  store  for  the  Earl  of  Mar.  .  .  . 
I  begin  now  to  fancy  that  he'll  hardly  ever  bring 
any  great  Retinue  this  way.  For  our  last  Saturday's 
advises  affirm  that  he  has  actually  intrench 'd  himself 
and  his  Highland  guards  at  Perth.  .  .  .  Our  greatest 
Danger  as  we  think  is  from  the  return  of  the  poor  hungry 
Highlanders  ;  should  they  be  scatter'd  into  parties  (as 
'tis  ten  thousand  to  one  that  they  will  be)  by  General 
Wills  and  left  to  make  the  best  of  their  way  to  their  own 
rocky  cells  in  the  braes  of  Athol  ...  I  should  be  pretty 
positive  in  my  opinion  that  they're  under  a  necessity  of 
engaging  with  the  King's  forces  ;  and  under  as  manifest 
a  certainty  of  being  beaten  by  them.  They  were  joyn'd 
at  Lancaster  by  Mr.  Dalton  and  other  neighbouring 
papists  to  the  number  (as  our  last  advises  tell  us)  of  400 
.  .  .  but  having  only  a  mob  of  their  press 'd  tenants  to 
trust  to  in  ye  day  of  Battle  yeir  hopes  of  Victory  cannot 
be  great." 

George  i.  was  not  as  prompt  as  he  should  have  been 
in  getting  over  troops  from  the  Continent  to  meet  the 
Pretender,  who  had  landed  in  Scotland  early  in 
December.  It  was  a  month  later  before  the  needed  re- 
inforcements reached  the  North.  On  gth  January  the 
Bishop  of  Carlisle  is  able  to  write  to  his  friend,  "  There  is 
no  doubt  but  that  ye  Dutch  troops  being  now  all  arriv'd 
the  Duke  of  A.  [Argyle]  will  quickly  move  towards  Perth 
and  ye  general  opinion  seems  to  be  that  the  Highland 
Clans  will  either  thereupon  disperse  or  (if  they  make  a 
stand)  fight  it  out  more  desperately." 

In  the  autumn  of  171 5  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
and  his  suffragans  issued  a  Declaration  of  Adherence  to 
the  new  King  and  against  the  Pretender  to  be  read  in 
churches,  and  on  the  22nd  November  the  Archdeacon 


42 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


of  Bradford  reports  as  to  the  attitude  of  the  clergy 
towards  the  Declaration.  The  Declaration,  he  says, 
"  appear'd  to  have  ye  general  approbation  without  any 
shadow  of  opinion  against  it.  .  .  .  Whatever  the  effect 
be  as  to  ye  Jacobite  I  have  hereby  set  a  great  many  of 
the  honest  Clergy  at  Liberty  who  wanted  and  desired 
opportunity  to  publish  it.  It  is  a  very  unhappy  circum- 
stance that  of  the  Bishop  of  Bristol's  refusing  to  join 
with  your  Lordships."  On  the  whole  the  non-signers 
are  few.  Whilst  he  is  writing,  he  says,  he  has  received  a 
letter  that  it  was  agreed,  at  a  meeting  of  the  disaffected, 
"  I  had  almost  said  Jacobite  clergy  at  ye  Bell  Inn  at 
Bradford  not  to  read  it  without  an  Episcopal  order  to  do 
so,"  but  he  hears  that  "  one  of  ye  greatest  Tories  in 
these  parts  read  it  in  his  church  last  Sunday." 

The  official  of  Bucks  reports  that  his  "  parochial 
clergy  have  signed  an  Association  testifying  their  '  Ab- 
horrence of  ye  present  unnatural  Rebellion.'"  The 
Bishop  of  Bristol  referred  to  b}^  the  Archdeacon  was 
of  course  the  doughty  Dr.  George  Smalridge,  who 
had  been  put  forward  for  the  Regius  Professorship 
of  Divinity  when  Potter  obtained  the  appointment 
in  1708.  Atterbury,  now  Bishop  of  Rochester — whose 
general  views  were  much  in  accord  with  Smalridge 's — 
joined  him  in  refusing  to  sign  the  Archbishop's  Declara- 
tion. Smalridge  ^  had  been  educated  at  Westminster 
and  Christ  Church,  and  in  171 3  became  Dean  of  Christ 
Church.  A  year  later  he  was  appointed  to  the  bishopric 
of  Bristol,  one  of  the  poorest  of  English  sees,  and  was  also 
made  Almoner  to  Queen  Anne.,  But  for  refusing  now 
to  sign  the  Declaration  he  had  to  resign  his  post  of 
Almoner.  At  Carlisle  and  Christ  Church  he  succeeded 
Atterbury.  From  Smalridge 's  good  nature  he  was  said 
to  carry  the  bucket  wherewith  to  extinguish  the  fires 
which  Atterbury  had  kindled. 

By  January  1716  the  Rebellion  was  crushed  and  the 

1  See  his  portrait  and  notes  of  him,  Nichol's  Illustrations  of  Litera- 
ture, iii.  225. 


1737]      EXECUTION  OF  REBEL  LORDS 


Pretender  hurrying  back  to  France.  At  the  end  of  the 
month  the  rebel  Lords  were  impeached,  and  except  Lord 
Wintoun  pleaded  guilty  before  Lord  Cowper,  the  Lord 
High  Steward,  in  Westminster  Hall.  Sentence  of  death 
was  passed  on  the  9th  February.  Wake  was  appealed 
to  by  many  of  the  convicted  rebels.  From  Orange  (and 
dated  February  7,  1716)  he  gets  an  appeal  from  Dr. 
Sharp,  the  chaplain  attending  on  the  Earl  of  Carnwath 
and  Viscount  Kenmure,  "  encouraged  by  the  just  reputa- 
tion yr  Grace  has  amongst  all  good  men  for  meekness, 
clemency,  and  moderation."  Of  these  two  Lord  Carn- 
wath was  kept  a  long  time  in  prison,  but  released  under 
Sunderland's  Act  of  Indemnity  in  July  1717.  Kenmure 
was  executed  on  Tower  Hill  with  Derwentwater  on  24th 
February  1716.  There  is  among  the  Wake  MSS  the 
original  of  the  following  pathetic  letter  from  Lady  Niths- 
dale  craving  Wake's  intercession  for  her  husband  : 

"  Your  Grace's  character  is  sufficient  to  embolden  ye 
miserable  tho'  not  personally  known  to  address  them- 
selves to  you  under  wch  title  none  can  have  a  greater 
right  to  doe  it  than  myself  who  am  wife  to  one  of  ye  un- 
fortunat  Lds  now  under  sentence  of  death  wch  makes  me 
humbly  beg  of  yr  Grace  you  will  induce  ye  King  to  be 
graciously  pleas 'd  to  suspend  ye  execution  of  ye  fatall 
sentence  he  lys  under  according  as  a  petition  will  be  pre- 
sented from  me  and  I  shall  think  myself  obliged  during 
life  to  pray  for  yr  Grace's  prosperity  as  becomes 
My  Ld, 

Your  Grace's  most  obliged  and  humble  servant, 

W.  NiTHSDALE." 

Was  she  then  planning  his  escape  in  woman 's  clothes  ? 

From  the  "Tour,"  20th  February  1716,  Robert 
Dalzell  and  Will  Gordon  crave  Wake's  intercession  : 
and  about  the  same  time  come  frequent  appeals  for 
the  archbishop's  intercession  signed  "  Widdrington." 
Lord  Widdrington,  like  Carnwath,  after  many  months' 
imprisonment,  got  the  benefit  of  Sunderland's  Act  of 
Indemnity.  All  through  1716  the  trials  of  the  rebels 
dragged  on.    The  unfortunate  cleric  Paul,  who  was 


44 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


almost  the  only  one  of  the  prisoners  in  the  Tower  who 
did  not  escape,  or  to  whom  the  royal  clemency  was  not 
extended,  sends  from  the  Tower  a  petition  to  the  arch- 
bishop "  your  Pet"^  (who  had  once  the  honour  to  be  in 
yr  Grace's  Dioces)  is  now  a  prisoner  in  Newgate  under 
conviction  for  being  unfortunately  at  Preston  amongst 
the  Rebells  whom  he  left  upon  the  first  opportunity 
before  the  King's  forces  came  up." 

Just  before  his  execution  he  writes  again  : 

"  According  to  all  accounts  Dr.  Hall  and  myself  are 
the  only  unfortunate  Persons  appointed  to  dye  to- 
morrow. I  am  fully  sensible  of  yr  Grace's  goodness  and 
therefore  flye  to  you  and  earnestly  entreat  your  Grace 
will  be  pleased  to  intercede  with  His  Royal  Highness  the 
Prince  att  this  my  last  extremity  that  he  would  be  graci- 
ously pleased  to  extend  mercy  to  a  humble  suppliant." 

Intercession  failed,  and  he  suffered  the  extreme 
penalty  with  four  or  five  others  at  Tyburn,  professing 
himself  a  true  member  of  the  Church  of  England,  but 
not  of  the  revolution  schismatical  Church. 

Convocation,  when  it  met  in  the  spring  of  1716,  pre- 
sented an  Address  to  the  Crown  in  which  both  Houses 
concurred  in  expressing  their  "  Abhorence  of  that  most 
unnaturall  Rebellion." 

The  Bishop  of  Carlisle  continued  to  supply  Wake 
with  information  concerning  the  results  of  the  Rebellion, 
and  throughout  1716  writes  him  constant  letters  about 
the  rebel  prisoners.  At  the  beginning  of  September 
1 716  a  troop  of  thirty  prisoners  was  brought  from 
Edinburgh  to  Carlisle  for  trial.  Their  condition  in 
Carlisle  Castle,  according  to  the  good  bishop,  during  the 
three  months  they  were  awaiting  trial  was  pitiable  ; 
they  had  to  lie  "  on  bare  straw,"  the  citizens  being 
unwilling  to  send  in  bedding  where  it  was  sure  to  rot  ; 
"  several,"  says  the  bishop,  "  were  roaring  in  fits  of  the 
gout  and  gravel."  The  episcopal  kindliness  of  heart 
got  them  leave  to  "  walk  by  three  or  four  at  a  time" 
under  "  proper  guard  on  ye  Batteries  of  ye  Castle." 


1737]    REBEL  PRISONERS  AT  CARLISLE  45 


Among  the  gentlemen  carried  to  Carlisle  was  one 
John  Rose,  son  of  the  Bishop  of  Edinburgh.  The 
bishop  had  been  mulcted  of  an  annuity  by  the  Rebellion, 
but  he  begs  Wake  to  intercede  for  his  son,  who  had 
been  "  led  away  by  the  common  example,"  and  so  was 
found  among  the  Pretender's  forces.  Wake  applies 
to  his  friend  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle  on  behalf  of  the 
young  man  :  but  the  good  bishop  is  too  anti-Jacobite 
to  be  very  sympathetic.  He  thinks  the  young  man 
has  no  one  but  himself  to  blame  :  "I  will  no  more 
bestir  myself,"  he  says,  "  for  him  the  Bishop  of  Edin- 
burgh's son  than  I  would  for  my  own  son  in  like  circum- 
stances." He  writes,  however,  to  the  archbishop, 
fully  and  often,  about  how  things  go  with  the  young 
man.  It  is  not  till  nearly  the  end  of  the  year  that  the 
Judges  reach  Carlisle  :  the  prisoners  were  pressed  to 
plead  guilty  and  trust  to  the  royal  mercy.  Some 
clever  counsel  suggested  a  demurrer  to  the  jurisdiction  : 
how  under  the  Act  of  Union  could  Scottish  prisoners 
be  tried  in  England  for  a  Scottish  crime.  Everyone 
from  the  Bench  downwards  was  alarmed  at  the  prospect 
of  the  demurrer.  "  You  will  do  better  to  drop  the 
demurrer,  plead  guilty  and  be  pardoned,"  was  the 
advice  given  to  the  prisoners. 

On  1 5th  December  1716  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle  writes 
to  Wake  : 

"  John  Rose  the  Bishop  of  Edinburgh's  son  came 
this  moment  to  the  bar,  and  desir'd  a  present  arraign- 
ment ;  pleaded  guilty,  and  made  so  handsome  an 
application  to  the  Court  that  his  case  is  sure  of  being 
very  favourably  represented." 

The  bishop  really  seems  to  have  done  his  best  for 
the  young  man.    Two  days  later  he  writes  from  Rose  : 

"  Your  letter  came  to  hand  when  I  was  with  Mr. 
Justice  Tracy  :  who  had  acquainted  me  with  the  like 
application  in  favour  of  ye  Bishop  of  Edinburgh's  son 
made  to  himself  by  the  Earl  of  Carnarvon.  Two  such 
advocates  were  soon  agreed  to  be  worth  a  whole  sheeve 


46 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


of  those  from  the  North,  and  thereupon  I  had  leave  to 
send  for  the  young  fellow  forthwith  to  the  Bar — where 
he  presently  appear'd,  desir'd  to  be  immediately 
arraign'd  and  that  being  granted  pleaded  guilty.  This 
he  did  in  so  becoming  a  manner  and  so  good  an  appear- 
ance of  a  true  penitent  heart  that  the  Judge  promis'd 
to  represent  his  case  favourably  to  His  Majesty  whose 
mercy  he  confidently  relyse  on.  I  had  never  seen  the 
young  man  before,  but  was  not  a  little  pleas'd  with  his 
modest  behaviour." 

Some  of  the  clergy  of  Jacobitish  sympathies  made 
a  trouble  about  the  Form  of  Prayer  for  ist  August,  the 
day  of  George  the  First's  accession.  It  was  not  univer- 
sally observed,  and  on  12th  March  1716  Gibson,  oculus 
episcopi  if  not  actually  yet  episcopus,  and  Hanoverian  to 
the  tips  of  his  fingers,  writes  to  Wake  showing  how  the  de- 
faulters should  be  brought  to  book,  and  suggests  taking 
the  opinion  of  the  Judges  whether  the  King  as  supreme 
head  of  the  Church  can  direct  by  proclamation  a  form 
of  service.  In  the  summer  of  1716  the  Bishop  of  Wor- 
cester writes  asking  the  Primate's  advice  about  parishes 
where  the  prescribed  service  for  ist  August  is  not  read. 

The  attitude  of  the  country  clergy  towards  George  i. 
and  his  family  continued  to  give  anxiety  to  the  Govern- 
ment and  the  leaders  in  the  Church  who  supported  the 
Government.  We  get  faithful  pictures  of  how  things 
stood  in  this  respect  in  the  reports  to  Wake  from  his 
subordinates.  Speaking  of  his  clergy,  says  a  Midland 
archdeacon,  who  had  just  held  his  visitation  under 
date  15th  April  1716,  "  they  took  occasion  at  dinner 
to  express  their  love  of  the  King,  even  those  of  Sparken- 
hoe  deanery  notwithstanding  their  being  distinguished 
as  High  Tories.  I  do  verily  believe  they  would  be 
found  more  obedient  subjects  than  they  may  appear 
or  are  represented  to  be  did  not  ye  indiscretion  of  some 
Dissenters  and  Low  Churchmen  raise  a  jealousie  in  'em 
of  the  Government  by  declaring  openly  they  wd  see  in 
a  little  time  the  clergy  sufficiently  humbled.  Such 
friends  do  great  disservice  to  the  Government." 


1737]  NEW  TEXT  OF  GREEK  TESTAMENT  47 


Wake  was  a  scholar,  and  scholars  could  count  on 
his  sympathy.  There  is  preserved  a  long  and  most 
interesting  letter  to  him  from  the  great  scholar  Bentley 
under  date  15th  April  1716  containing  a  proposal  by 
the  latter  to  publish  a  new  Text  of  the  Greek  Testament. 
Bentley  calls  attention  to  "ye  vast  heap  of  various 
lections  found  in  MSS  of  5^6  Greek  Testament."  After 
saying  that  this  was  a  favourite  theme  of  freethinkers 
and  "  one  of  Collins'  Topics  in  his  Discourse  on  Free- 
thinking,"  and  that  he  (Bentley)  had  lately  been  led 
into  a  "  new  course  of  study,"  he  says,  "  I  find  I  am 
able  (what  was  once  thought  impossible)  to  give  an 
Edn  of  ye  Greek  Text  exactly  as  it  was  in  ye  best  exem- 
plars at  ye  time  of  ye  Council  of  Nice,"  so  that  there 
shall  not  be  "  twenty  words  nor  even  Particles  Differ- 
ence." He  asserts  that  the  Text  of  the  New  Testament 
had  suffered  more  than  that  of  most  classical  authors  : 
he  expresses  a  poor  opinion  of  the  Vulgate,  and  says  : 
"  Pope  Sixtus  and  Clemens  at  a  vast  expense  had  an 
assembly  of  learned  divines  to  recense  and  adjust  ye 
Latin  Vulgate  and  then  enacted  their  new  Edition 
authentic.  But  I  find,  though  I  have  not  yet  discovered 
anything  done  dolo  malo,  they  were  quite  unequal  to 
ye  affair.  They  were  mere  theologi,  had  no  experience 
in  MSS  nor  made  use  of  good  Greek  copies  and  followed 
books  of  five  hundred  years  before  those  of  double  age, 
nay  I  believe  they  took  those  new  ones  for  ye  older  of  ye 
two  ;  for  it  is  not  everybody  knows  ye  age  of  a  MSS." 
Wake  received  the  project  with  encouragement,  and 
made  useful  suggestions  to  the  great  scholar. 

In  July  1 716  George  i.  was  able  to  leave  England  for 
his  beloved  Hanover,  having  got  Parliament  to  set  him 
free  to  go.  Smollett  says  that  he  went  to  secure  his 
German  dominions  against  the  Swedes  (who  were  vexed 
at  his  having  in  the  interests  of  Hanover  bought  up 
and  with  English  money  the  secularised  bishoprics  and 
Bremen  and  Verden),  "  and  Great  Britain  from  the 
Pretender."    Hanover  was  nearest  his  heart.  Wake 


48 


WILLIAM  WAKE  [1716- 


sent  a  chaplain  with  him  in  the  person  of  Lancelot 
Blackburne,  then  Dean  of  Exeter,  afterwards  Bishop 
of  Exeter,  and  ultimately  Archbishop  of  York. 
Townshend  was  deposed  from  being  Prime  Minister,  and 
the  chief  power  came  into  the  hands  of  Sunderland  and 
Stanhope,  who  were  Secretaries  of  State.  Mr.  Secretary 
Stanhope,  who  had  thus  far  distinguished  himself  as  a 
soldier,  went  with  his  royal  master. 

The  character  of  Lancelot  Blackburne — who  is  not 
to  be  confused  with  Archdeacon  Francis  Blackburne, 
the  Broad  Churchman  of  "  the  Confessional,"  who 
flourished  half  a  centurj^  later — is  not  good  as  an 
ecclesiastic.  Horace  Walpole's  dictum  of  him,  that  he 
had  been  a  buccaneer  and  was  now  clergyman,  retain- 
ing nothing  of  his  former  profession  but  the  seraglio, 
though  seriously  inaccurate,  has  fatally  besmirched  it. 
His  doings  as  a  prelate  fell  short  of  our  standards.  But 
Wake  apparently  thought  not  unfavourably  of  him. 
There  are  many  letters  from  him  to  Wake  in  the  Wake 
MSS.  The  later  ones  display  too  much  eagerness  for 
preferment.  But  after  reading  his  character  as  given 
by  ecclesiastical  historians  one  finds  the  tone  of  them 
better  than  one  would  expect. 

George  i.  left  Gravesend  on  9th  July,  and  on  17th 
July  Blackburne  writes  from  Hanover  to  Wake  as  to 
what  he  calls  "  the  voyage  which  your  Grace  has  done 
me  the  honour  to  cut  out  for  me.  Mr.  Secretary  Stan- 
hope came  himself  on  board  ye  next  day  after  he  had  seen 
his  Majesty  on  board  his  between  three  and  four  in  the 
afternoon,  and  we  all  sail'd  soon  after  with  a  very  gale 
towards  ye  coast  of  Holland.  We  had  six  men-of-war 
for  our  convoy,  two  others  having  been  sent  before  to 
look  out  upon  the  coast  of  France  from  whence  there 
had  been  intelligence  of  some  ill  design."  .  .  .  On 
arriving  off  the  Dutch  coast  he  says  "  we  could  not  weigh 
till  His  Majesty  after  being  very  sea-sick  was  gone  off 
thither  in  his  own  boat." 

The  duties  of  chaplain  to  George  i.  on  one  of  his 


1737]       BLACKBURNE  AS  CHAPLAIN  49 


excursions  to  his  beloved  Hanover  were  not  severe,  and 
Blackburne  winds  up  liis  letter  by  saying,  "  Mr.  Secy, 
has  undertaken  to  know  the  King's  pleasure  as  to  the 
appearance  I  am  to  make  and  the  duty  I  am  to  do 
here  which  I  cannot  think  will  be  any  way  burthensome." 
On  31st  July  he  writes  again  : 

"  Lord  Burford  and  Ld  N.  Pawlet  were  very  sollici- 
tous  to  know  where  and  how  they  should  spend  the 
Sunday.  ...  I  said  '  I  shd  be  ready  to  say  prayers  to 
'em  in  a  good  room  at  my  own  lodgings  both  in  the 
morning  and  evening  ...  we  made  up  a  congregation  of 
above  twenty.'  " 

He  gets  the  offer  in  a  day  or  two  of  both  the  Lutheran 
and  Reformed  Churches  for  his  services ;  as  to  the 
former  he  doubts  "  how  far  ye  English  here  might  be 
scandalised  at  the  crucifix  on  the  altar,"  and  the 
Reformed  Church  is  taken.  "  I  yesterday,"  he  says, "  read 
prayers  and  preach'd  in  the  morning  and  read  Prayers 
also  in  the  afternoon  to  a  pretty  large  congregation  who 
made  the  Responses  regularly,  and  made  it  so  that  I 
did  not  much  miss  a  Clerk."  "  There  is  no  surplice  here, 
and  being  in  doubt  whether  they  can  make  one  here 
which  will  not  be  awkward,"  he  says,  "  he  shall  not  get 
one  unless  the  Archbishop  directs  him  to  do  so." 

He  brings  Wake  into  touch  with  the  great  scientist 
Leibnitz,  who  sends  the  archbishop  a  parcel  of  his 
books.  In  another  letter  dated  in  September  1716,  from 
Hanover,  Blackburne  says  :  "  Both  the  Lutherans  and 
the  Calvinists  look  upon  Leibnitz  as  an  unbeliever, 
and  the  Laymen  of  the  Court  say  he  has  his  religion 
to  choose  and  was  ready  to  turn  Roman  Catholic,  but 
y'  they  would  not  come  up  to  his  bargain."  But  this 
is  the  common  fate  of  men  that  have  more  learning  or 
a  larger  mind  than  others.  Leibnitz's  death  is  reported 
a  little  later. 

Blackburne  was  not  in  love  with  his  duty  at  Hanover, 
and  by  the  end  of  the  year  he  is  back  at  his  Deanery  of 
Exeter.    But  his  stay  at  Hanover  had  tightened  his 


50 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


connection  with  the  Court  and  Stanhope,  then  a  power- 
ful Minister,  and  on  the  last  day  of  the  year  he  writes 
to  Wake  that  he  has  heard  from  Hanover  from  Stanhope 
"  that  His  Majesty  had  been  pleas'd  to  assure  him  that 
upon  his  arrival  in  England  he  intends  the  Bishoprick 
of  Exon  for  me."  England  recovered  the  much-needed 
presence  of  its  monarch  in  January  171 7,  and  Blackburne 
duly  got  his  bishopric. 

A  foolish  quarrel  between  George  i.  and  his  son  the 
Prince  of  Wales  broke  out  in  November  171 7.  The 
Prince's  wife,  the  great  Caroline  of  Anspach,  gave  birth  to 
a  son  on  3rd  November.  The  King  ordered  the  Duke 
of  Newcastle  to  stand  sponsor  for  him,  the  Prince  of 
Wales  having  designed  this  honour  for  his  brother  the 
Duke  of  York.  After  the  christening,  the  Prince  of 
Wales,  says  Smollett,  "  expressed  his  resentment  against 
this  nobleman  in  very  warm  terms."  George  i.  turned 
his  son  and  his  son's  wife  out  of  St.  James's,  but  detained 
their  children.  The  newly  born  prince  languished,  and 
in  a  week  or  two  died.  Caroline  was  very  ill  :  on 
loth  November  Townshend,  the  Prime  Minister,  writes 
to  Wake  : 

"  Whitehall. 

"  The  Princess  is  much  better  this  evening  than  she 
was'  in  the  morning  ;  however,  Sir  David  Hamilton 
being  of  opinion  that  she  is  still  in  some  danger,  the 
Lords  think  it  will  be  proper  for  your  Grace  to  order  her 
to  be  publickly  prayed  for  in  the  Churches  of  London 
and  Westminster." 

On  27th  November  171 7  notice  comes  from  the 
Duke  of  Newcastle  that  His  Majesty  has  appointed 
the  "  christening  of  ye  young  Prince  to-morrow  between 
seven  and  eight  in  the  evening  at  ye  Princess's  lodgings  in 
St.  James's."  His  Majesty  hopes  "  'twill  be  convenient 
to  your  Grace  to  be  there  at  that  time." 

There  had  been  probably  some  tension  between  the 
King  and  his  son  before,  but  it  blazed  up  over  the  poor 
little  baby's  christening.    It  seems  hard  to  justify  the 


1737]      EFFORTS  AT  RECONCILIATION  51 


King's  attitude  to  his  son  and  daughter-in-law.  Well- 
wishers  of  the  powers  that  were  felt  their  cause  weakened 
by  this  unworthy  squabble.  Wake  tried  to  smooth  it 
down,  but  without  effect.  Several  of  his  correspondents 
refer  to  it. 

The  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  Nicholson,  writes  in  December 
1717  : 

"  I  shall  least  of  all  be  able  to  bear  up  against  Rents 
and  schisms  in  ye  Royal  Family.  ...  I  trust  by  your 
Grace's  interposition  all  Blackness  is  already  remov'd 
from  that  quarter  and  that  their  Royal  Highnesses  are 
return'd  to  St.  James's  in  perfect  peace.  .  .  ." 

And  ten  days  later,  again  : 

"  My  heart  akes  when  (sleeping  or  waking)  I  think 
of  St.  J.    God  grant  peace  !  " 

Smalridge,  the  doughty  Tory,  Bishop  of  Bristol  and 
Dean  of  Christ  Church,  writes  on  the  8th  December  1 71 7  : 

"  When  I  lately  did  myself  the  honour  of  congratu- 
lating with  Her  R.H.  upon  ye  birth  of  the  young  Prince 
I  had  no  apprehensions  that  there  wd  be  so  soon 
afforded  too  just  a  ground  of  being  afflicted  for  her 
and  condoling  with  her  :  but  to  our  great  surprise  and 
grief  we  hear  that  even  that  Birth  which  we  esteem'd 
a  Blessing  to  the  whole  nation  and  more  particularly 
to  ye  Royall  Family  has  accidentally  been  the  occasion 
of  a  Breach  where  ye  most  intire  Union  is  desir'd  by 
all  sincere  friends  of  the  Government.  Into  the  grounds 
of  that  misunderstanding  it  becomes  not  private  persons 
curiously  to  enquire,  but  I  am  sure  we  may  with  the 
utmost  duty  to  all  our  superiors  lament  the  terrible 
consequences  of  it,  and  more  especially  the  sad  effect 
we  hear  it  has  had  upon  Her  Royal  Highness 's  health 
.  .  .  while  you  are  permitted  to  attend  her  she  cannot 
want  ye  advice  of  a  faithfull  and  prudent  Counsellor." 

The  writer's  prayer  is  that  when  he  comes  to  London 
and  waits  on  the  Prince  and  Princess  he  may  find  them 
at  St.  James's. 

On  5th  April  1718,  the  archbishop  gets  news  that 


5^ 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


last  night,  about  seven  o'clock,  Baron  Bothmar  brought 
a  message  from  His  Majesty  to  the  governess,  letting 
her  know  that  it  was  his  royal  pleasure  that  she  should 
leave  her  charge  and  dispose  of  herself  elsewhere  ;  "  but 
that  ye  rest  of  ye  attendants  on  ye  young  Princesses 
were  allow'd  to  continue  "  in  their  respective  posts. 

It  is  not,  however,  until  two  years  later  that  the 
Prime  Minister  Sunderland  is  able  on  23rd  April  to  write 
to  the  archbishop  : 

"  I  have  the  honour  of  acquainting  y""  Grace  with  a 
piece  of  news  that  I  daresay  will  be  more  agreeable  to 
you  than  anything  that  has  happened  since  the  King's 
accession  to  the  Crown,  it  is  the  reconciliation  of  the 
King  and  Prince  which  is  at  last  happily  brought  about 
with  the  dignity  of  the  King  and  to  the  mutual  satis- 
faction of  both  sides  the  immediate  consequence  of  this 
will  be  the  entire  reunion  of  the  Whig  Party  in  both 
Houses  which  will  be  attended  with  all  other  good 
consequences  honest  men  can  desire." 

Down  to  this  time  the  Prince  and  Princess  had  been 
living  at  Norfolk  House.  The  Royal  reconciliation 
gladdened  the  hearts  of  all  well-wishers  to  the  Govern- 
ment. On  the  28th  April,  Jonathan  Winchester  (Tre- 
lawney)  writes  from  Wolvesey  to  the  archbishop  : 

"  I  can't  conclude  my  letter  before  I  express  ye 
great  joy  I  have  at  ye  reconciliation  of  ye  King  and 
Prince  which  must  make  the  Royal  Family  happy  and 
ye  Kingdom  easy  because  I  have  ye  pleasure  to  believe 
you  had  a  hand  in  it." 

Wake's  dealings  as  archbishop  with  Convocation 
were  confined  to  a  short  period  of  time.  The  Canter- 
bury Convocation  of  1714  had  terminated  by  Anne's 
death,  having  been  largely  in  its  last  session  occupied 
with  the  writings  of  Dr.  Clarke.  Under  George  i.  Parlia- 
ment and  Convocation  met  together  in  March  1 7 1 5 .  Both 
Houses  of  Convocation  concurred  in  an  address  to  the 
new  monarch  on  7th  April,  and  in  his  reply  he  said  :  ^ 

*  Lathbury,  History  of  Convocation,  440. 


1737]         WAKE  AND  CONVOCATION  53 


"  I  thank  you  for  your  very  dutiful  and  loyal 
address.  .  .  .  You  may  be  assured  I  will  always  sup- 
port and  defend  the  Church  of  England  as  by  Law 
established  and  make  it  my  particular  care  to  en- 
courage the  clergy." 

The  usual  sermon  was  preached  by  Gibson,  then 
Rector  of  Lambeth  and  Archdeacon  of  Surrey. 

The  royal  letters  to  proceed  to  business  arrived 
on  sth  May.  The  matters  included  regulation  of  ex- 
communications, terriers  and  accounts  of  glebes  and 
tithes,  marriage  licences,  a  form  for  consecrating 
churches,  titles  for  orders,  enforcing  the  canons,  touch- 
ing sober  conversation  of  ministers,  the  supply  and 
licensing  of  curates,  preparation  for  confirmation. 
Of  these  matters  the  bishops  undertook  the  3rd,  4th, 
5th,  and  Sth  ;  the  others  were  left  to  the  Lower  House. 
A  form  for  consecrating  churches,  being  a  revision  of  a 
form  passed  by  Convocation  in  171 2  and  signed  by 
Tenison,  was  drawn  up  by  the  bishops.  Attention, 
Lathbury  suggests,  had  been  drawn  to  the  need  of 
such  a  form  by  the  fact  that  some  of  the  fifty  new 
churches  authorised  by  Parliament  in  171 1  were  ripe 
for  consecration. 

The  Lower  House  condemned  The  Dijficulties  and 
Discouragements  which  attend  the  Study  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, published  by  Dr.  Hare,  then  Dean  of  Salisbury, 
afterwards  Bishop  of  Chichester,  the  ancestor  of  Augus- 
tus and  Julius  Hare,  two  very  distinguished  Church- 
men of  our  own  day.^  They  also  agreed  to  a  Declara- 
tion to  make  the  75th  Canon  touching  the  sober  con- 
versation of  ministers  more  effectual.  The  House  of 
Commons  had  replied  favourably  to  a  royal  message 
commending  to  the  House  a  request  from  the  Com- 
missioners for  building  the  fifty  new  churches  for 
maintenance  of  the  ministers  of  such  churches,  and 
the  two  Houses  of  Convocation  in  August  171 5  united 
in  an  Address  of  Thanks  to  the  Crown  for  the  royal 

1  Hore,  i.  326. 


54 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


liberality.  The  Convocation  was  adjourned  in  Sep- 
tember following  and  did  not  meet  for  business  till 
January  1716.  Meanwhile  Tenison  had  died,  and  Wake 
was  in  the  Primate's  chair. 

It  is  not  surprising  that  Wake,  who  in  the  first 
years  of  the  century  had  taken  a  leading  part  in  the 
Convocation  controversies,  should,  now  that  he  had 
become  President  of  the  Southern  House,  address  him- 
self with  special  care  to  matters  affecting  its  being 
called  together.  The  death  of  the  President  presented 
difficulties  which  required  care. 

Atterbury  was  by  this  time  out  of  the  way,  having 
been  made  Bishop  of  Rochester,  and  Dr.  Stanhope, 
Dean  of  Canterbury,  had  succeeded  him  as  prolocutor. 
There  was  consultation  between  Wake  and  Stanhope 
in  December  171 5  as  to  the  method  of  reassembling  the 
Convocation,  and  apparently  one  or  other  of  them 
consulted  Cowper,  the  Lord  Chancellor.  On  the  i8th 
December,  Stanhope  writes,  giving 

"  The  Lord  Chancellor's  opinion  concerning  the 
state  of  our  Convocation  affairs  :  who  after  giving  up 
as  utterly  impracticable  any  expedient  for  making 
a  regular  adjournment  from  the  16th  was  un- 
determined in  his  judgment  whether  the  Discontinu- 
ance be  not  a  Dissolution  and  do  not  render  a  new 
choice  necessary,  or  whether  by  writ  directed  to  me  and 
the  Chapter  and  a  Deputation  from  us  thereupon  the 
same  body  may  re-assemble  the  9th  January.  I  told 
him  yr  Grace's  opinion  was  that  the  King  had  power  to 
call  the  same  together.  His  Lordship  thought  this  the 
more  desireable  expedient."^ 

Precedents  were  to  be  looked  up.  Meanwhile 
Atterbury,  whose  opinion  Wake  naturally  valued  on 
Convocation  questions,  as  any  wise  man  values  the 
opinion  of  an  old  antagonist,  is  quoted  by  Stanhope  : 
"  The  Bishop  of  Rochester  entirely  agrees  in  the  opinion 
of  His  Majesty's  power  to  reassemble  us  in  the  manner 
I  ment^  before."    Dean  Stanhope  writes  again  a  week  or 

1  WakeMSS,  1715. 


^ 

1737]        LAST  CONVOCATION  IN  171 7  55 

two  later,  that  the  uncommon  rigour  of  the  season 
furnishes  an  unanswerable  argument  against  assembling 
the  Convocation.  Wake  wrote  out  himself  and  settled 
with  great  care  the  form  of  the  Convocation  writ,  which 
he  submits  for  Atterbury's  approval,  who  writes,  "  I 
have  no  manner  of  exception  to  ye  Form  of  Writ  which 
your  Grace  hath  been  pleased  to  communicate  to  me." 

As  the  actual  meeting  of  Convocation  draws  near, 
Wake  becomes  careful  that  everything  should  be  in 
order.  There  is  a  "  method  of  Proceeding  in  ye  Chapell 
of  Henry  vii."at  the  opening.  The  Upper  House  can 
only  sit  in  the  Jerusalem  Chamber  by  leave  of  the 
Dean  ;  on  this  Atterbury,  who  was  Dean  of  Westminster 
as  well  as  Bishop  of  Rochester,  is  consulted,  and  he 
encloses  a  letter  from  Tenison,  asking  his  (Atterbury's) 
consent  to  the  use  of  the  Jerusalem  Chamber  "  a  part 
of  yr  Lordship's  mansion  house,"  as  Tenison  calls  it. 
Atterbury  is  now  entirely  at  peace  with  his  old  opponent, 
indeed  they  had  come  together  at  Exeter.  "  Whatever 
ye  expressions  are  if  it  appears  by  them  that  ye  Jeru- 
salem Chamber  is  made  use  of  by  my  consent  the  end 
of  such  a  letter  is  satisfy'd." 

We  propose  to  deal  in  Archbishop  Potter's  life 
with  the  story  of  the  Bangorian  Controversy  arising 
out  of  the  publications  of  the  notorious  Hoadly, 
Bishop  of  Bangor.  The  first  Convocation,  summoned 
under  Wake  as  Primate,  met  in  171 7.  Its  proceedings 
were  almost  entirely  devoted  to  Hoadly,  and  form  a 
part  of  the  story  of  the  Bangorian  Controversy,  and  we 
have  treated  them  accordingly  ;  as  we  have  detailed 
in  our  life  of  Potter,  they  ended  in  the  silencing  of 
Convocation  for  one  hundred  and  fifty  years. 

Mr.  Lathbury,  in  his  classical  work  on  Convocation, 
says  that  in  171 7  Wake  "  wished  to  see  the  Convocation 
assembled  ;  and  the  prohibition  of  its  meetings  at  this 
period  was  purely  the  act  of  the  Whig  Ministry  in  which 
the  governors  of  the  Church  were  in  no  way  concerned." 
There  is  a  letter  of  Atterbury's  in  his  correspondence, 
5 


56 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


under  date  the  8th  November  171 7,  which  seems  to  bear 
this  out.  The  archbishop,  he  says,  was  of  opinion 
that  he  should  be  permitted  to  hold  the  Convocation  ; 
and  had  told  the  Prolocutor  (Dr.  Stanhope), 

"  From  whom  I  had  it  that  he  wd  adjourn  it  to- 
morrow till  the  22nd  and  from  thence  by  like  inter- 
missions till  Xmas,  after  which  the  clergy  shd  meet 
and  act.  But  when  I  was  last  in  Town  I  found  from 
good  hands  that  he  was  as  much  mistaken  on  this 
occasion  as  he  had  been  on  many  others  ;  it  being 
resolved  in  a  great  Council  last  week  at  Hampton 
Court  to  prorogue  the  Convocation  by  a  new  Royal 
Writ  till  February  next." 

Whether  the  Government  and  Wake  intended  in 
171 7 — and  1 71 8 — that  the  non-issuing  of  a  licence  to 
do  business  should  be  chronic  is  uncertain.  Probably 
not  ;  it  was  sufficient  for  the  time  that  it  should  do 
nothing  then.  There  is  a  letter  in  February  1719  from 
Sunderland  to  Wake  which  seems  rather  to  point  to 
its  meeting  again  for  effective  business.  The  Prime 
Minister  says  : 

"  I  had  the  honour  of  yr  Grace's  letter  and  acquainted 
the  King  with  what  you  mentioned  in  relation  to  the 
Convocation.  There  will  be  a  Cabinett  Councill  this 
morning  at  St.  James  where  his  Maj'^  will  order  the 
writt  for  Proroguing  them.  The  day  the  King  intends 
it  if  you  approve  is  Wednesday  the  8th  of  April  next." 

But  the  fact  remains  that  after  171 7  the  Government 
were  induced,  as  Mr.  Lathbury  says,  "  to  suspend  the 
regular  synodical  business  of  Convocation."  From  that 
time  he  adds  "  no  royal  licence  was  granted."  The 
Convocation  assembled  with  every  Parliament  ;  but 
the  meeting  was  purely  formal. 

So  strongly  had  the  dissensions  in  Convocation  been 
felt  that  even  then  there  were  found  those  who  con- 
gratulated Wake  on  its  becoming  silent.  On  the  i6th 
November  171 7  his  friend,  Bishop  Nicholson  of  Carlisle, 
still  writing  from  Rose,  says  : 


1737]  WAKE  AND  NONCONFORMIST  RELIEF  57 

"  I  cannot  help  congratulating  your  Grace  on  the 
new  Prorogation  of  ye  provincial  Synod .  If  ye  suffragans 
and  their  inferior  clergy  had  drawn  different  ways  (as 
they  probably  would  have  done),  no  good  work  cd  have 
been  wrought  and  the  Bp.  of  B.'s  worshippers  would 
have  had  greater  occasion  of  triumph  than  I  trust  they 
will  now  have." 

Wake,  as  Archbishop,  has  been  charged  with  taking 
a  line  in  Parliament  inconsistent  with  that  which  he  had 
down  to  that  time  adopted.  At  any  rate  it  has  been 
said  by  Whiston  and  others  that  any  sympathy  which 
Wake  had  shown  with  Liberal  principles  of  comprehen- 
sion and  toleration  was  rapidly  and  effectively  dropped 
when  he  was  once  seated  on  the  archiepiscopal  throne. 
Wake  was  not  the  man  to  adopt  principles  in  which 
he  did  not  believe  to  gain  thereby  distinction  or  wealth, 
nor  was  he  the  sort  of  man  that  makes  a  turncoat ;  apart 
from  the  wretched  Schism  Act  any  change  of  view  may 
be  defended  on  the  ground  that  as  Primate  he  mey 
have  been  justly  cautious  ;  a  Primate  stands  first  and 
alone  ;  he  is  no  longer  one  of  many  equally  clothed 
with  responsibility.  George  i.  was  certainly  no  better 
friend  to  religion  or  the  Church  than  Anne  had  been. 
Wake,  archbishop  in  1719,  may  have  felt  a  distrust  of 
change,  for  which  Wake,  bishop  in  171 1,  had  seen  no 
need.  He  would  justify  his  refusal  to  repeal  the  Schism 
Act,  as  he  did,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  a  dead  letter 
not  worth  the  trouble  of  a  repeal. 

Very  soon  after  becoming  Primate  he  had  to  deal 
with  the  proposals  of  Ministers  to  relieve  the  Dissenters. 
The  Dissenters  as  a  body  were  zealous  supporters  of 
the  Hanoverian  Dynasty,  and  George  i.,  though  in  every 
speech  of  his  to  Parliament  he  had  protested  his  inten- 
tion to  support  the  Established  Church,  had  given  the 
Dissenters  reason  to  think  they  would  get  relief. 

The  Acts  which  especially  galled  them  were  the 
Old  Test  Acts  of  Charles  11.,  the  Occasional  Con- 
formity Act,  and  the  Schism  Act  of  Anne's  later 


58 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


years.  Of  these,  of  course,  the  second  grew  out  of 
the  first.  Two  Acts  of  Charles  11.,  passed  in  the  fever 
heat  of  triumphant  RoyaHsm,  13  Charles  ii.,  and 
25  Charles  11.,  required  any  Candidate  for  office — 
municipal,  military,  or  otherwise — to  receive  the  Com- 
munion according  to  the  rites  of  the  Church  of  England 
before  being  admitted  to  office.  The  churchwardens  of 
his  parish  had  to  be  present  and  certify  to  his  having 
duly  communicated.  Not  unnaturally  a  Dissenting 
Mayor  or  Alderman,  having  qualified  for  and  taken 
office,  resumed  attendance  at  the  chapel  which  he  was 
in  the  habit  of  attending.  This  was  a  shocking  grievance 
to  the  Tory  High  Churchman.  And  there  was  justice 
in  their  complaint.  It  was  disgraceful  that  a  man 
should  participate  in  the  holiest  service  of  the  English 
Church  when  his  own  conduct  showed,  the  next  Sunday, 
that  his  heart,  ecclesiastically  and  religiously,  was 
elsewhere.  But  the  disputed  point  was  whether  the 
Test  Acts  which  the  Tories  stoutly  supported  were 
not  the  real  cause  of  the  mischief. 

Letters  to  Archbishop  Wake  from  clergy  show  that 
in  some  churches  the  communicants  who  came  to 
"  qualify  "  were  treated  separately  from  those  who  came 
for  devotion.  However,  the  Tories  throughout  Anne's 
reign — in  the  language  of  the  Vicar  of  Bray — thought 
"  the  church  in  Danger  was  by  the  Prevarication  "  of  the 
Occasional  Conformists.  Three  times,  with  the  help  of 
Anne,  in  1702,  1703,  and  1704,  the  Commons  had  passed 
an  occasional  Conformity  Bill  inflicting  penalties  for 
occasionally  conforming.  But  the  Whigs  in  the  Lords, 
especially  the  Whig  bishops  under  Burnet,  got  it  thrown 
out.  It  was  not  till  the  end  of  171 1  that  Nottingham, 
stoutest  of  Churchmen,  made  a  bargain  that  if  the  Lords 
would  pass  the  measure  he  would  give  the  Whigs  support 
on  the  war  and  other  questions.  So  the  Bill  passed  the 
Upper  House  and  was  greedily  accepted  by  the  Commons. 
It  enacted  that  any  person  who  after  admission  to  office 
should  be  "  present  at  any  conventicle  "  should  be 


1737]      REPEAL  OF  CONFORMITY  ACT 


59 


liable  to  a  fine  of  £40,  to  be  recovered  by  the 
Prosecutor. 

With  the  passing  of  the  third  of  the  Acts,  Boling- 
broke's  Schism  Act,  we  have  already  dealt,  and  need 
only  repeat  that  Wake  opposed  and,  with  his  friend  Lord 
Cowper,  signed  a  Protest  against  it.  By  the  end  of  1716 
Townshend  was  getting  into  disgrace  with  George  i.,  and 
Sunderland  and  Stanhope  were  soon  to  be  the  King's 
Chief  Ministers.  Relief  to  the  Dissenters  became  an 
important  item  in  the  Ministerial  programme,  being  sup- 
ported by  Walpole  who  was  at  difference  with  Sunder- 
land and  Stanhope  on  other  points. 

So  far  back  as  March  17 16  the  Chancellor  writes  to 
the  Archbishop  : 

"  March  14,  1 716. 
"  My  Lord  Archbishop, — I  believe  yr  Grace  has  reed 
before  this  time  notice  of  a  visit  from  ye  E.  of  S.  and  Mr. 
Stanhope.  I  hope  this  will  come  soon  enough  to  let  you 
know  beforehand  the  business  of  it.  'Tis  in  ye  King's 
name  to  sound  yr  Grace's  opinion  on  a  Repeal  of  ye  Act 
against  occasional  Conformity.  I  din'd  ^^esterday  with 
them  and  Mr.  Bernsdoff  and  ye  same  mater  was  then  ye 
subject.  I  truly  own 'd  I  never  liked  ye  Act  and  joyn'd 
in  passing  it  as  it  is  least  it  should  have  pass'd  as  it 
would  have  done  if  oppos'd  in  a  worse  maner.  But  to 
my  great  surprise  I  was  so  fortunate  as  to  convince  them 
both  yt  it  was  not  fit  to  have  that  Bill  of  Repeal  and  that 
about  the  University  going  at  ye  same  time  ;  upon  this 
they  took  a  sudden  turn  and  became  resolv'd  to  have 
this  of  ye  Repeal  first  and  postpone  that  concerning  ye 
Universitys  wch  your  Grace  knows  how  lately  and  how 
much  ye  K  as  they  said  had  set  his  heart  upon  ...  I 
thought  yr  Grace  wd  be  content  to  have  a  little  warning." 

In  February  1 7 1 7  Wake  gets  a  letter  from  his  friend 
Lady  Cowper,  the  Chancellor's  wife,  in  which  she  gives 
his  Grace  intimation  that  "  House  of  Commons  being 
now  so  empty  by  reason  of  ye  members  being  gone  into  ye 
Country  this  occasion  is  thought  proper  to  bring  in  ye 
Occasional  Bill."  "  As,"  she  goes  on  "  I  know  yr  Grace's 
sentiments  upon  it  I  thought  it  my  duty  to  give  you 


6o 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


notice  of  it  and  beg  you  would  not  name  it  from  me  but 
make  yr  own  use  of  it." 

Wake,  as  was  natural,  consulted  his  suffragans  :  from 
the  first  there  was  considerable  difference  of  opinion 
amongst  Churchmen,  including  the  Episcopal  Bench, 
about  the  measure. 

His  friend,  Nicholson  of  Carlisle,  writes  to  him  in  the 
summer  of  1 7 1 7  : 

"  I  had  an  opportunit}'  of  walking  a  good  deal  in  the 
Park  with  the  Bishops  of  Lincoln  and  Exeter.  The 
former  seem'd  surpriz'd  at  my  telling  them  that  I  had 
heard  (from  a  good  hand)  that  ye  Repeal  of  ye  Occasional 
Act  was  again  upon  the  anvil." 

After  saying  that  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  had  been 
"  sounded  (that  morning)  upon  that  point  "  and  seemed, 
the  writer  thought,  "  to  be  fully  resolv'd  against  giving 
ground,"  "  whether  "  he  goes  on  "  my  Br  of  Lincoln 
will  be  equally  stout  I  cannot  foretel  .  .  .  and  3'et,"  says 
Carlisle,  "  I  cannot  suspect  him  of  giving  wa}-  to  what  (I 
am  sure)  he  thinks  to  be  damnable  h3'pocris3\" 

Lincoln  of  course  was  Gibson  and  Exeter  Black- 
burne. 

Later  in  November  171 7  Gibson  writes  to  the  Arch- 
bishop : 

"  Yesterday  the  Bishops  of  Worcester,  Gloucester 
and  mj'self  were  desir'd  to  be  at  yt  Bishop  of  Norwich's 
this  morning  at  1 1  o'clock  and  we  found  there  ye  Bishops 
of  Sarum  and  Lichfield.  The  occasion  of  3'e  meeting  was 
which  way  it  wd  be  best  to  proceed  in  with  regard  to  ye 
Bill  for  Corporations,  and  tho'  that  of  offering  to  receive 
ye  Sacrament  and  admitting  such  offer  as  a  full  qualifica- 
tion was  mentioned  yet  it  appear 'd  to  be  ye  sense  of  ye 
whole  compan}'  that  ye  more  desireable  method  would 
be  to  abolish  the  Sacramental  Test  so  far  as  it  concerns 
Corporations." 

The  Prelates,  or  some  of  them,  were  keen  that  Wake 
should  command  their  attendance  upon  him  "  on  this 
subject." 


1737]      REPEAL  OF  CONFORMITY  ACT  6i 


The  Bishop  of  Norwich,  Trimnell,  had  been  tutor  to 
Sunderland's  family,  and  was  a  leader  among  the  Whigs. 

About  the  same  time,  Carlisle  again  writes,  putting 
forward  the  more  Tory  views  which  doubtless  many,  if 
not  most,  of  the  country  clergy  held  : 

"  2 1st  November  1717. 

"  No  Bishop  can  now  without  giving  great  cause  of 
offence  consent  to  ye  relaxing  of  any  of  the  laws  in 
being  for  the  security  of  our  Ecclesiastical  Establish- 
ment. Most  of  ye  Clergy  and  Laity  of  our  communion 
are  justly  alarm 'd  with  a  new  Doctrine — that  ye  most 
moderate  penalties  and  smallest  negative  Discourage- 
ments which  guard  conformity  in  religious  worship  are 
unchristian — countenanc'd  by  those  who  now  in  His 
Majesty's  name  move  for  such  a  Relaxation.  .  .  .  The 
least  infringement  of  the  Occasional  Act  or  ye  Test 
Law  in  favour  of  Dissenters  without  a  previous  or  con- 
current censure  of  ye  said  position,  seems  to  be  of 
pernicious  consequence  to  the  Public  Peace." 

Perhaps  it  was  counsels  of  friends  like  this  that  made 
Wake  in  171 8  so  stoutly  oppose  the  "Bill  for  strengthen- 
ing the  Protestant  Interest."  It  must  be  remembered 
too  that  by  this  time  Hoadly  had  issued  his  "  Preserva- 
tive "  and  preached  his  celebrated  sermon. 

Throughout  1 7 1 8  foreign  affairs,  especially  in  the  war- 
like operations  against  Spain,  occupied  public  attention. 
Lord  Stanhope  had  to  go  to  .Spain,  and  though  George  i. 
in  his  speech  at  the  opening  of  Parliament  had  promised 
a  Bill  for  the  greater  strengthening  the  Protestant 
interest,  it  is  not  till  November  171 8  that  we  hear  of 
ministers  again  consulting  the  Primate.  On  23rd  Nov- 
ember 1 71 8,  Sunderland  writes  to  Wake  that  the  Lord 
Chancellor,  Lord  Stanhope,  and  Sec.  Craggs  proposed 
to  dine  with  the  Primate  at  Lambeth  on  the  following 
day,  but  having  heard  that  he  had  been  "  something  in- 
dispos'd  "  wished  to  know  whether  he  would  give  them 
another  day  or  stick  to  the  day  following. 

As  Stanhope  introduced  the  Occasional  Conformity 


62 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Bill  on  the  13th  December  171 8,  it  seems  pretty  certain 
that  that  was  to  be  the  topic  of  the  meeting. 

About  the  same  time  as  Ministers  were  contriving  a 
Repeal  of  the  Occasional  Conformity  Act  and  other  Acts 
objected  to  by  the  Dissenters,  the  idea  of  a  Royal  Letter 
to  the  archbishop,  for  communication  to  the  bishops  and 
clergy  dealing  chiefly  with  Romish  aggressions,  was  on 
foot.  Gibson,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  drafted  it,  and  it  was 
settled  by  Trimnell  of  Norwich.  It  dealt  with  the 
"  unusual  Liberty  divers  clergymen  and  others  had 
lately  shewn  "  in  "  maintaining  and  publishing  several 
Doctrines  and  Superstitions  of  the  Church  of  Rome  on 
purpose  to  lessen  the  aversion  "  of  the  King's  subjects  to 
Popery,  also  with  a  tendency  in  some  of  the  clergy, 
through  dislike  of  Rome,  "  to  deny  all  kind  of  Power 
within  a  Christian  Church." 

Ministers  were  very  anxious  to  get  Wake's  support 
for  the  Occasional  Conformity  Bill.  Perhaps  they 
thought  he  might  be  propitiated  if  his  plan  of  a  Royal 
Letter  were  adopted  ;  at  any  rate  on  the  1 2th  December 
1718,  Sunderland  deals  with  the  Bill  and  the  Royal 
Letter  in  the  same  letter  to  Wake.    He  writes,  he  says  : 

"  In  particular  by  the  King's  order  to  show  your 
Grace  the  enclos'd  copy  of  the  Bill  about  the  Occasional 
Conformity  which  Lord  Stanhope  is  to  bring  to-morrow 
into  the  House.  Your  Grace  will  see  by  it  that  though 
it  be  absolutely  necessary  for  the  King's  affairs  to  have 
this  matter  brought  on  yet  there  is  in  ye  framing  and 
shaping  of  all  the  regard  had  to  the  Dignity  of  the 
Church  and  the  case  of  the  Clergy  as  was  possibly 
consistent  with  making  it  effectuall  for  the  Public 
Service  of  the  Government,  and  indeed,  I  think  it  is 
truely  so  fram'd  as  not  to  leave  a  reall  conscientious 
and  religious  objection  to  it.  The  King  therefore  hopes 
it  will  not  meet  with  your  Grace's  Disapprobation.  I  am 
sure  there  never  was  a  King  who  was  more  sincerely  and 
more  strongly  determined  to  support  the  Establish'd 
Church  and  consult  its  honour  nor  who  has  a  greater 
desire  to  shew  the  utmost  regard  to  yourself  as  the 
Head  of  that  Church  under  him.  ...  I  have  read 


1737]    WAKE'S  SPEECH  ON  CONFORMITY  63 


to  the  King  the  draught  you  sent  me  of  the  letter  who 
has  ordered  me  to  tell  you  that  whenever  you  think 
proper  he  will  order  it  to  be  prepar'd  for  his  signing  : 
approving  and  liking  every  part  of  it,  and  to  assure 
you  that  he  will  be  ready  to  do  everything  towards 
making  it  effectuall  which  yr  Grace  can  suggest  to  him." 

On  the  copy  of  the  Bill  which  Sunderland  sent  to 
Wake  is  a  note  in  Sunderland's  handwriting  ;  a  clause 
is  to  be  added  to  hinder  "  any  magistrate  carrying  the 
ensigns  of  honour  to  any  other  place  of  publick  worship, 
but  the  Established  Church."  This  found  its  way  into 
the  Act. 

Wake  did  not  receive  the  draft  Bill  at  all  kindly. 
His  endorsement  on  the  draft  Sunderland  sent  him  is 
"  for  enlarging  the  Act  of  Indulgence  I  suppose  on 
behalfe  of  Socinians,  Arians,  &c."  He  prepared  very 
elaborate  notes  of  his  speech  or  speeches  against  it  in  the 
House  of  Lords.    On  these  notes  he  has  written  : 

"  The  Heads  of  my  speech  in  the  Hs  of  Lords  agst 
repealing  the  Occasional  Conformity  Bill. 

"  Here  I  was  both  deserted  and  betray'd  by  my 
Brethren  some  of  whom  had  encouraged  me  in  my 
opposition.    I  pray  God  forgive  them. 

"  Mem.  In  order  to  the  settling  of  this  worthy 
Bill  a  meeting  was  had  Sunday  night  to  which  I  was  not 
invited  between  the  Ministry  and  Bps  (proper  for  such 
a  work). 

"  One  not  in  the  secret  asked  whether  the  Archbishop 
would  be  there.  It  was  answered  that  being  late  and 
a  stormy  night  they  believed  not.  Such  was  their 
sincerity!  I  had  my  acct.  of  this  meeting  from  my 
Lord  Chancellor  Cowper,  and  in  part  from  the  good 
Bp  of  L.  Cov.  The  Bps  at  the  meeting  are  thus  marked 
(x)  in  the  printed  List." 

Attached  to  these  notes  is  a  Printed  List  of  "  the 
Lords  spiritual  and  temporal  "  who  voted  for  or  against 
the  Repeal  of  the  several  Acts  made  for  the  security  of 
the  Church  of  England. 


64 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Under  the  list  "  for  the  Church,"  which  numbers 
seventy-eight,  are  the  two  archbishops  and  thirteen 
bishops  including  those  of  London,  Chichester,  and 
Lichfield. 

The  supporters  of  the  Bill,  according  to  the  list, 
numbered  ninety-six,  including  the  Bishops  of  Bangor, 
Lincoln,  Worcester,  Salisbury,  Gloucester,  Peterboro, 
and  Carlisle. 

Wake  has  marked  with  a  small  cross  Lincoln, 
Worcester,  Gloucester,  and  Salisbury  as  being  present 
at  the  Sunday  evening  "  Cabal,"  as  he  calls  it. 

The  course  the  Bill  took  in  the  House  of  Lords  was 
as  follows  :  Stanhope  brought  it  in  on  13th  December 
under  the  title  of  a  Bill  for  strengthening  the  Protestant 
interest  in  these  kingdoms,  and  the  second  reading 
was  moved  on  the  15th.  There  was  a  suggestion  of  a 
long  adjournment.  A  leading  opponent  of  the  Bill  in 
the  Lords  suggested  that  during  a  month's  adjournment 
the  Lord  Chancellor  should  write  circular  letters  to 
summon  all  the  Lords  to  attend,  upon  the  severest  penalty 
the  House  could  inflict.  Another  Lord,  though  of  the 
same  opinion,  thought  it  needless  to  give  the  Lord 
Chancellor,  who  had  business  enough  upon  his  hands, 
the  trouble  of  writing  circular  letters,  and  suggested 
that  every  Lord  then  present  should  write  to  his  absent 
friends,  letters  so  written  being,  he  said, "  more  acceptable 
and  effectual  than  a  formal  summons." 

A  long  adjournment  was,  however,  distasteful  to 
Ministers,  and  it  was  resolved,  without  dividing,  that 
the  second  reading  should  only  be  put  off  till  i8th 
December.  On  that  day  it  was  read  a  second  time, 
and  on  a  motion  to  refer  it  to  a  Committee  of  the  whole 
House  a  noble  Lord  required  the  opinion  of  the 
Episcopal  Bench  on  a  measure  "  wherein  the  Church 
was  so  nearly  concerned."  Thereupon  Wake  delivered 
himself  of  a  speech  against  the  Bill. 

This  speech,  as  it  appears  in  the  parliamentary 
debates,  is  far  more  meagre  than  his  notes,  still  extant, 


1737]  VOTES  OF  BISHOPS 


65 


would  lead  us  to  expect.  According  to  the  parliamentary 
history  he  said  he  had  "  all  imaginable  tenderness  for 
all  the  well-meaning  conscientious  Dissenters,  but  he 
could  not  forbear  saying  that  some  amongst  them  made 
a  wrong  use  of  the  favour  and  indulgence  that  was 
shown  them  upon  the  Revolution  though  they  had  the 
least  share  in  that  event."  Of  the  Schism  Act,  at  the 
close  of  his  speech  he  said  that  though  it  might  carry 
a  face  of  severity  yet  it  seemed  needless  to  make  a  law 
to  repeal  it,  since  no  advantage  had  been  taken  of  it 
against  the  Dissenters  ever  since  it  was  made. 

Sir  William  Dawes,  who  in  17 14  had  been  promoted 
from  Chester,  to  which  see  he  had  been  appointed  in 
1707,  to  York,  agreed  with  his  brother  of  Canterbury, 
urging  that  the  Acts  against  Occasional  Conformity 
and  Schism  were  proper  means  of  self-defence  and 
preservation,  and  that  the  Dissenters  were  never  to 
be  gained  by  indulgence.^  The  Episcopal  Bench  gave 
their  views  indeed  fully,  though  with  considerable 
differences  of  opinion  among  themselves.  The  Bishop 
of  London,  who  supported  the  archbishops,  was 
Robinson,  a  diplomatist  rather  than  a  divine  ; 
Smalridge  of  Bristol,  Gastrell  of  Chester,  and  of 
course  Atterbury  of  Rochester,  also  opposed  the  Bill. 
Equally,  of  course,  Hoadly,  whom  Anne  would  not 
make  a  bishop  but  who  had  been  appointed  to  Bangor 
in  1715,  supported  the  Bill,  maintaining  that  all  tests 
were  objectionable,  and  that  the  Acts  sought  to  be 
repealed  were  persecuting  Acts  on  a  par  with  the 
Inquisition  morally  :  so  did  Willis  of  Gloucester, 
Gibson,  and  White  Kennet  of  Peterboro'.  Next  day 
the  debate  was  resumed.  Wake  spoke  again  against 
the  Bill,  as  did  Atterbury, — Trimnell  of  Norwich  sup- 
porting the  Bill.  In  the  end  the  committal  of  the  Bill 
was  carried  by  86 — 19  proxies,  against  68 — 18  proxies. 

On  20th  December,  in  grand  Committee,  the  refer- 
ence to  the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts  was  struck  out, 

*  See  Parliamentary  Debates,  1719. 


66 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Lord  Cowper  supporting  this  view.  The  motion  to 
repeal  the  Act  was  carried  by  55  against  33. 

The  ties  that  bound  Wake  to  Gibson  of  Lincoln 
and  White  Kennet  of  Peterboro',  who  had  preached 
the  sermon  at  his  consecration  as  Bishop  of  Lincoln, 
were  very  close,  and  we  can  well  understand  his  annoy- 
ance at  their  throughout  voting  in  support  of  the  Bill 
in  opposition  to  him.  The  Bill  was  read  the  third  time 
in  the  Commons  after  considerable  debate  on  loth 
Januar}^  1719-  As  it  passed  into  Law  (it  is  5  George  i. 
cap.  i.)  it  is  short,  simply  repealing  the  main  section  of 
10  Anne,  cap  3,  the  Occasional  Conformity  Act,  and 
the  Schism  Act,  12  Anne,  cap  7.  The  clause  fore- 
shadowed by  Sunderland,  forbidding  a  Mayor  from 
attending  any  conventicle  with  his  insignia  of  office, 
found  a  place  in  the  Act. 

Wake  was  not  only  a  man  without  enemies  but  he 
was  a  man  looked  up  to  by  persons  of  all  opinions  and 
ranks.  His  qualities  were  sterling  and,  universally, 
the  estimate  men  had  of  him  was  high.  We  find  the 
Secretary  of  State,  Craggs  of  South  Sea  Bubble  fame, 
writing  to  ask  him  to  examine  a  counterfeiter  of  French 
bank  notes,  who  was  willing  to  make  a  confession  of 
his  plot  to  Wake  and  no  one  else.  With  Lord  Cowper, 
a  Lord  Chancellor  of  great  distinction  who  twice  held 
the  Seals — for  the  second  time  from  17 14  to  171 8 — he 
was,  as  we  have  hinted,  on  terms  of  intimate  friendship. 
When  long  intrigue  had  driven  Cowper  to  resign  the 
Lord  Chancellorship,  he  communicates  the  fact  at  once 
as  to  a  valued  friend. 

On  the  15  th  April  171 8  he  writes  : 

"  I  set  down  in  haste  to  do  my  duty  to  your  Grace  in 
sending  you  word  that  this  day  about  3  o'clock  I  sur- 
rendered ye  great  Seale  into  his  Majesty's  hand."  The 
Chancellor  intimates  that  he  had  found  "  that  service 
wd  not  consist  with  any  tolerable  degree  of  health. 
.  .  .  I  was  so  heartily  weary  of  it  on  many  other 
accounts." 


1737]  FIFTY  NEW  CHURCHES  FOR  LONDON  67 


The  Chancellor's  lady  writes  Wake  a  most  friendly- 
note  to  tell  of  her  husband's  retirement : 

"  I  needn't  tell  your  Grace  what  reasons  have 
induc'd  him  to  take  this  step  ;  many  of  ym  are  but  too 
visible,  and  ye  rest  I  hope  we  shall  chatt  over  as  soon 
as  I  come  to  town.  ...  I  beg  yr  Grace  to  be  assur'd 
you  have  not  two  more  faithful  servants  in  ye  world  yn 
my  Lord  and  I  and  yt  in  all  conditions  of  life  yr  Grace's 
esteem  and  friendship  will  be  ye  greatest  pleasure  to 
us  both." 

There  is  a  warm  message  to  "  Dear  "  Mrs.  Wake. 

The  friendship  and  correspondence  between  the 
two  distinguished  men  by  no  means  came  to  an  end  at 
this  time.  In  August  1720,  Wake  paid  Cowper  a  visit 
at  his  country  seat  in  Hertfordshire In  the  following 
year  Cowper,  who  had  had  to  try  the  Bristol  waters, 
and  who,  however  he  may  have  fallen  out  with 
George  i.,  or  George  11.  personally,  was  a  steady  sup- 
porter of  their  dynasty — writes  to  Wake  :  "  There  was 
not  ye  least  madding  on  ye  Pretender's  birthday  nor 
inclination  to  it  that  cd  be  observed."  The  quotation 
is  interesting  as  showing  that  a  counter  Revolution 
was  never  far  absent  from  our  rulers'  minds  down  to 
the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century. 

In  171 1  the  scheme  for  building  fifty  new  churches 
in  and  near  London  had  been  started.-  The  Upper 
House  of  Convocation  had  petitioned  the  Crown  to 
recommend  to  Parliament  the  great  and  necessary 
work  of  building  more  churches  within  the  bills  of 
mortality.  The  Commons  had  already  instructed  a 
committee  to  report  what  churches  were  wanting,  and 
the  Lower  House  of  Convocation  on  28th  February 
1 710  had  sent  a  deputation,  with  Atterbury  its  Speaker 
at  its  head,  to  the  Speaker  "  to  signify  their  readiness 
to  promote  the  work."  In  reply  to  a  message  from 
the  Queen  recommending  "  so  good  and  pious  a  design," 

'  L.  Campbell,  Lives  of  the  Chancellors,  calls  it  Colegreen. 
Stanhope  s  Queen  Anne,  479. 


68 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


the  Commons  appointed  a  committee  to  report  what 
was  in  hand  of  the  fund  for  rebuilding  St.  Paul's,  and 
what  churches  were  wanting  in  London  and  Westminster. 
Their  report,  which  was  adopted  by  Resolution  of  the 
House  on  29th  March  171 1,  was  that  fifty  new  churches 
were  necessary,  computing  4750  souls  to  each  church. 
In  their  address  to  the  Crown  the  Commons  stated  that 
"  Neither  the  long  expensive  war  in  which  they  were 
engaged  nor  the  pressure  of  heavy  debts  under  which 
they  laboured  should  hinder  them  from  granting  what- 
ever was  necessary  to  accomplish  so  excellent  a  design." 
For  the  supply  they  granted  that  part  of  the  duty  on 
coals  which  had  been  devoted  to  the  rebuilding  of  St. 
Paul's  Cathedral.  Zeal  seems  to  have  slackened  in  this 
cause.  Mailland,  writing  in  1756,  says  that  only  ten  of 
the  fifty  had  been  built,  amongst  them  St.  John's,  West- 
minster, at  a  cost  of  £2^,2^7  ;  St.  Mary  Le  Strand,  at  a 
cost  of  £\6,i^  \  ;  and  Bloomsbury,  at  a  cost  of  ;£9793. 

No  more  zealous  Churchman  lived  at  the  end  of  the 
seventeenth  and  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  centuries 
than  Dr.  Thomas  Bray,  one  of  the  original  founders  of 
the  S.P.C.K.  and  afterwards  of  the  S.P.G.  He  had 
visited  America  as  the  commissary  of  the  Bishop  of 
London  in  1700.  He  wrote  to  Dr.  Wake  several  times 
about  the  church-building  project  and  the  maintenance 
of  the  clergy  of  the  new  churches  and  parishes.  One  of 
these  letters, dated  the  1 2th  December  1 71 8,  is  interesting. 

"  I  fear,"  says  Dr.  Bray,  "  we  are  to  hear  no  more 
of  our  fifty  new  churches  to  be  built  in  the  suburbs. 
But  that  the  remaining  part  of  the  Fund  if  continued 
is  likely  to  be  diverted  to  the  Rebuilding  of  some  of  our 
old  ones  within  the  Liberties  of  the  City.  What  they 
will  have  to  answer  for,  who,  by  their  Petitions  for 
Diverting  the  Fund  from  its  truly  Christian  and  original 
Design,  seem  to  prefer  Pompous  Edifices  to  the  Edifica- 
tion of  souls,  I  leave  it  to  God  to  determine  when  the 
Account  of  the  numerous  souls  committed  to  our  charge 
shall  be  required  at  our  Hands,  As  one  having  '  near 
20,000  souls  in  my  own  cure,'  "   he  recommends,  to 


1737] 


WEEK  END  "-ING  IN  BATH 


69 


get  powers  in  the  next  Act  to  divide  the  great  Parishes 
and  to  settle  the  Hmits  of  the  fifty  new  Parishes  to  be 
taken  out  of  them,  where  there  are  no  new  churches  to 
make  "  the  Chapels  pro  tempore  Parochial,"  and  to 
build  new  ones  as  temporary  Tabernacles  as  was  done 
after  the  fire,  which  may  be  built  on  leasehold  sites, 
"  there  being  eno'  to  build  twenty  such." 

A  Memorial  circulated  about  the  same  time  seems 
to  foreshadow  the  modern  "  week  end  "-ing  which  has 
so  affected  London  churches. 

"  There  seems  also  a  humour  prevailing  much  more 
of  late  years  than  formerly  among  many  Inhabitants 
of  the  Town,  especially  the  wealthier  sort,  of  keeping 
country  houses  and  lodgings,  as  is  evident  from  the  great 
increase  of  Buildings  in  most  of  the  Villages  and  Places 
within  ten  miles  of  London.  Besides,  it  may  not  be 
unreasonable  to  suppose  the  Town  to  be  more  healthy 
than  formerly,  there  having  been  no  Plague  of  late 
years  and  the  Openness  of  the  new  Streets  as  well  as  the 
late  great  supplies  of  water  contributing  very  much 
to  the  Health  of  the  Inhabitants." 

Wake  must  have  had  strong  recuperative  power,  for, 
during  his  archiepiscopate,  if  not  before,  he  was  con- 
stantly indisposed.  In  the  summer  of  1719  he  went — 
as  then  did  all  invalids  or  semi-invalids  who  could 
afford  it — to  Bath  and  Bristol  for  the  waters.  His 
friend  Wotton  writes  to  him  in  August  to  say  that  he  is 
glad  his  disease  was  at  last  found  to  be  the  stone.  "I 
hope,"  says  he,  "  since  you  have  so  early  discovered  y* 
malady,  that  Dr.  Mead  "  (the  celebrated  physician  of  the 
eighteenth  century)  "  will  set  you  up  again  so  as  to 
enjoy  a  better  state  of  health  than  y'  Grace  have  had 
of  late  years."  George  i.  was  in  Hanover,  and,  as  a 
Lord  Justice,  Wake  throughout  August  and  September 
1 719  gets  constant  reports  from  Delafaye,  the  Secretary 
of  the  Privy  Council,  from  Whitehall  as  to  the  doings 
of  the  British  forces  in  Sweden  and  North  Germany,  and 
in  Sicily.  As  to  foreign  affairs,  Delafaye  says  on  the 
nth  August,  "the  Czar  by  appearing  at  y*  mouth  of 


70 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


the  River  of  Stockholm  with  his  500  galleys  and  30,000 
men,  has  driven  the  Swedes  to  make  peace  with  y* 
King  as  Elector,  leaving  him  fully  in  possession  of 
Bremen  and  Verden,  and  y*  alliance  with  His  Majesty 
as  King  of  Great  Britain  was  forthwith  to  be  renewed." 
Two  da3^s  later  he  notifies  the  Primate  of  a  secret 
treaty  with  the  King  of  Prussia.  In  September  Delafaye 
speaks  of  a  Preliminary  Convention  with  Sweden,  who 
has  "  granted  what  we  desired  on  behalf  of  y*  King  of 
Prussia;  so  here  is  a  Protestant  Alliance  established 
which  will  enable  His  Majesty  to  preser^'e  our  Religion, 
save  y*  Kingdom  of  Sweden,  and  restore  peace  to  y* 
North,  and  indeed  to  all  Europe." 

One  of  Delafaye 's  from  Whitehall  in  September  1719 
announces  that  "  several  Bills  are  come  from  Ireland, 
including  one  inflicting  the  most  terrible  punishment 
known  to  male  humanity  (short  of  Death)  on  '  all 
unregistered  Popish  Priests  and  Ecclesiastics  that  do 
not  depart  thence  by  a  time  prefixt  or  come  after  that 
time.'  "  It  is  not  strange  that  English  statesmen 
two  hundred  years  later  have  an  Irish  question  to  deal 
with. 

In  1 72 1,  Wake  took  an  active  part  in  promoting 
"  the  Bill  for  suppressing  blasphemy  and  profaneness," 
and  the  documents  preserved  among  the  Wake  MSS. 
gives  us  a  good  picture  of  the  interest  he  took  in  the 
matter.  Probably  the  supposed  wealth  to  be  derived 
from  the  South  Sea  Bubble  had  had  a  bad  effect  upon 
Society's  morals.  Smollett  says,  "  the  adventurers, 
intoxicated  by  their  imaginary  wealth,  pampered  them- 
selves with  the  rarest  dainties  and  the  most  expensive 
wines  that  could  be  imported  ;  they  purchased  the  most 
sumptuous  furniture,  equipage,  and  apparel,  tho'  without 
taste  or  discernment ;  they  indulged  their  criminal 
passions  to  the  most  scandalous  excess  ;  their  discourse 
was  the  language  of  pride,  insolence,  and  ostentation  ; 
they  affected  to  scoff  at  religion  and  morality,  and  even 
to  set  heaven  at  defiance." 


1737] 


THE  HELL-FIRE  CLUB 


71 


Early  in  the  year  an  anonymous  letter  came  to 
Wake  complaining  of  "an  abominable  sett  of  young 
gentilemen,  as  they  call  themselves,  distinguishing 
themselves  at  the  same  time  as  members  of  a  Club  to 
which  they  have  given  the  name  of  the  Hell-fire  Club." 
.  .  .  "  They  were  very  lately  at  a  play,  where  they  so 
affrighted  a  friend  of  mine  with  they'r  monstrous 
talk  as  gave  the  agony  of  apprehension  that  Hell  wou'd 
open  instantly  to  receive  'em." 

It  appears  from  the  names  the  writer  gives  that 
they  were  of  good  family. 

Another  similar  letter  to  the  archbishop  says  that 
God  is — 

"  dayly  contemn'd  in  most  publick  Companyes  by 
a  company  of  vile  wretches  y''  give  themselves  ye  name 
of  ye  Hell-fire  Club.  .  .  .  theirs  some  Ladyes  among 
them  .  .  .  only  they  don 'tt  goe  to  y*  Taverne." 

In  conjunction  with  Lord  Nottingham  and  Lord 
Trevor,  Wake  determined  to  move,  and  it  was  resolved 
to  frame  a  Bill  to  meet  the  evil. 

On  27th  March  1721  the  archbishop  gets  the  draft 
Bill  with  a  letter  from  the  draftsman  : 

"  My  Lord  Nottingham  has  perused  and  approved 
it,  but  submits  it  to  y'  judgment.  .  .  .  Lord  Notting- 
ham hopes  y''  Grace  will  take  the  first  opportunity  to 
move  for  leave  to  bring  it  in." 

The  care  which  Wake  took  in  the  matter  is  shown 
by  his  extant  notes  on  the  draft  Bill.  There  is  a  rough 
set  of  notes  on  the  Bill,  line  by  line  in  his  own  writing, 
with  an  amended  copy  of  such  notes  also  in  his  own 
writing.  Then  he  gets  the  Bill  back  from  the  drafts- 
man with  Wake's  amendments  incorporated,  and  a 
letter  saying  that  Lord  Trevor  and  Lord  Nottingham 
have  entirely  approved  the  Bill  "  as  modified  by  y' 
Grace." 

Then  comes  the  draft  of  a  very  interesting  letter 
6 


72 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


by  Wake,  dated  22nd  April  1521,  to  (apparently)  the 
draftsman  : 

"  I  went  on  Wednesday  to  the  H.  of  Lords,  where 
I  received  the  Breviat  of  ye  Bill  from  my  Lord  Not., 
and  had  some  discourse  wth  his  Ldship  concerning  it. 
I  communicated  the  substance  of  it  to  two  of  my 
brethren  and  conferr'd  with  some  of  the  other  Lords 
about  it.  But  had  so  little  encouragement  to  proceed 
with  it  that  I  thought  it  more  advisable  to  defer  an}'' 
present  motion  for  leave  to  bring  in  such  a  bill  than  to 
do  it  at  such  a  disadvantage  as  I  must  have  done  had  I 
then  gone  on  with  it." 

He  goes  on  to  say  that  he  is  dissatisfied  with  some  of 
the  clauses  and  is  consulting  "  a  worthy  and  judicious 
friend  "  and  Lord  Trevor. 

There  are  elaborate  notes  for  Wake's  speeches  (i) 
on  moving  for  leave  to  bring  in  the  Bill,  covering  two 
sides  of  foolscap  and  of  which  the  last  section  is  : 

"  All  I  propose  is  to  strengthen  the  laws  already  in 
force — not  to  look  back,  but  forward  ;  not  to 
restrain  men's  opinions,  but  their  open  attempts 
and  actions — 

To  support  the  religion  established  agst  ye 

bold  attempts  yt  are  made  agst  it ; 
To  strengthen  the  Act  of  K.  Wm.,  and  preserve 
the  peace  of  Religion. 

(2)  Upon  moving  for  a  Bill,  &c.,  and 

(3)  After  the  2nd  Reading." 

The  Bill  was  not  well  framed.  Its  main  provision 
was  that  if  anyone  spoke  against  the  being  of  God,  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity  or  the  inspiration  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, or  the  doctrine  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  he 
should  be  liable  to  three  months'  imprisonment.  It 
had  an  unfortunate  course  in  the  House  of  Lords.  It 
was  introduced  by  Lord  Willoughby  de  Broke,  who  was 
Dean  of  Windsor.  After  the  second  reading  Wake 
moved  to  have  it  committed,  and  was  supported  by  the 
Bishops  of  London  and  Winchester  and  by  Wake's 
friend,  Chandler,  Bishop  of  Worcester.    But  the  bulk 


1737] 


THE  BILL  FAILS 


73 


of  the  peers  opposed  it,  including  the  profligate  Duke 
of  Wharton,  who  pulled  out  of  his  pocket  and  quoted 
from  an  old  family  Bible,  and  Lord  Peterboro'  who  said 
he  did  not  desire  a  Parliamentary  God.  Even  the 
Episcopal  Bench  was  not  unanimous  for  the  Bill.  White 
Kennet,  another  great  ally  of  Wake,  said  it  seemed 
like  setting  up  an  inquisition.  In  the  end  it  was  put 
off  to  a  long  day  by  sixty  to  thirty-one,  and  no  more  was 
heard  of  it. 

Wake's  endorsement  on  his  notes  is  : 

"  This  was  a  new  cause  of  offence  given  to  the 
Ministers,  tho'  I  had  a  meeting  with  them  about  this 
Bill  and  their  consent  to  appear  for  it.  And  here  I  was 
again  deserted  by  my  Brethren,  as  in  the  other  Bill  for 
Repealing  the  Act  against  occasional  conformity." 
After  sa3ang  that  the  Bill  wanted  amending,  he  goes  on  : 
"  To  excuse  themselves  one  of  my  Brethren  published 
a  paper  in  print  in  which  he  vilely  misrepresented  the 
true  design  both  of  the  Bill  and  those  who  appear 'd  for  it. 
I  thank  God  for  the  part  I  had  in  it  :  to  shew  at  least 
my  earnest  desire  to  have  some  effectual  care  taken  to 
suppress  the  crying  sins  of  Blasphem}^  and  Profanesse." 

Something  that  Wake  said  in  the  Debate  gave 
Ministers,  especially  Sunderland,  much  offence.  He 
complained  to  Wake's  friend,  the  Bishop  of  Lichfield, 
of  it.  Wake  in  his  turn  felt  aggrieved  and  sent  a  letter 
to  the  Minister,  of  which  the  draft,  corrected  even  to 
the  point  of  being  scarcely  legible,  is  preserved.  After 
saying  that  the  Minister  must  have  "  very  much  mis- 
taken "  what  the  archbishop  said,  or  the  latter  must 
have  "  said  somewhat  utterly  contrary  to  what  I 
intended  to  speak,"  and  reminding  Sunderland  that  he 
had  often  in  Wake's  hearing  expressed  his  dislike  of 
the  liberties  "  that  have  been  taken — in  opposing  the 
great  and  Fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Christian 
religion,"  and  claiming  that  he  had  expressed  this  in 
his  speech,  goes  on  :  "  It  surely  must  have  been  very 
strange  for  me  after  this  to  charge  the  spreading  of 
these  wicked  doctrines  upon  the  Ministry  of  which  yr 


74 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Lordship  is  the  chief.  I  cannot  certainly  tell  whether 
I  was  not  accused  to  have  gone  farther  and  to  have 
treated  his  Majie  himselfe  otherwise  than  it  became  me 
in  duty  to  do." 

Of  course  Wake  vigorously  disclaims  having  said 
anything  of  the  sort,  and  acknowledges  that  he  has 
"  had  many  obligations  "  to  Sunderland,  "  which, 
however,  you  may  trust  me,  I  will  always  thankfully 
acknowledge."    He  winds  up  : 

"  Yr  Lordship  may  have  me  as  you  please.  If 
you  think  fit  a  Friend  (such  I  have  profess'd  myselfe 
and  am  still  willing  to  be) — But  if  I  may  not  have  that 
Honour  I  will,  however,  for  a  due  sense  of  the  favours  I 
have  received  from  you,  whatever  be  the  result  of  this 
transaction,  always  professe  myself,  my  Lord,  yr  Lord- 
ship's much  obliged  humble  servant,  W.  C." 

Next  da}^  Sunderland  writes  a  very  respectful  and 
friendly  letter  to  the  archbishop. 

On  the  28th  April  1721  the  Royal  Proclamation  is 
published  calling  attention  to  "  certain  Scandalous 
Clubs  or  Societies  of  young  persons  who  meet  together, 
and  in  the  most  impious  and  blasphemous  manner  insult 
the  most  Sacred  Principles  of  our  Holy  Religion,  and 
making  provision  for  their  suppression  and  punishment." 

On  the  7th  May  1721  there  was  issued  the  Royal 
Letter  of  Directions  to  our  archbishops  and  bishops  for 
the  Preserving  of  Unity  in  the  Church  and  the  Purity 
of  the  Christian  Faith,  particular^  in  the  Doctrine  of 
the  Holy  Trinity.  These  invited  attention  to  the  Acts 
of  13  Eliz.  and  9  Will.  iii.  for  the  punishment  of  persons 
preaching  contrary  to  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  and  im- 
pugners  "  by  writing,  printing,  teaching,  or  advised 
speaking"  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Trinit}''  or  the 
Scriptures.  It  was  circulated  with  a  letter  from  the 
archbishop.  He  had  drafted  a  longer  letter  referring 
to  the  Act  of  Uniformity,  but  this  seems  to  have  dropped 
out  of  the  letter  actually  sent. 

His  colleague  of  York  and  his  successor  at  Canter- 


1737]     TRELAWNEY  OF  WINCHESTER  75 


bury,  Potter  of  Oxford,  "  gratefully  ackne  the  receipt 
of  the  Directions  and  Letter." 

In  July  1 72 1,  Wake  gets  news  of  the  death  of  the 
stout  old  Cornish  baronet,  Sir  Jonathan  Trelawney, 
Bishop  of  Winchester,  at  the  Palace  at  Chelsea  of  the 
see  of  Winchester.  He  had  written  only  the  preceding 
April  to  express  his  readiness  to  obey  the  archbishop's 
"  commands  of  being  at  ye  Bill  against  Blasphemy." 
There  are  few  stranger  figures  among  the  bishops  of 
the  early  eighteenth  century.  It  is  said  that  in  his 
earliest  episcopal  days  he  excused  himself  for  his  much 
swearing  by  saying  that  he  swore  as  a  baronet  and  not 
as  a  bishop.  He  was  urgent  in  his  entreaties  to  get 
some  good  see  from  James  11.,  and  Mr.  Hore  suggests 
that  it  was  the  fact  of  his  only  getting  Bristol  that 
made  him  one  of  the  seven  bishops  who  were  sent  to 
the  Tower.  He  was  promoted  to  Exeter  in  1689,  and 
from  thence  to  Winchester  in  1707. 

Burnet  says  that  his  promotion  to  Winchester  "  gave 
great  disgust  to  many,  he  being  considerable  for  nothing 
but  his  birth  and  his  interest  in  Cornwall."    His  letters 
to  Wake  are  numerous,  most   of   them  dated  from 
Wolvesey  :  they  express  great  veneration  for  and  readi- 
ness to  follow  the  lead  of  the  Primate.    Trelawney  had 
not  only  taken  the  oaths  to  William  and  Mary,  but  had 
become  a  stout  supporter  of  the  Hanoverian  dynasty. 
In  a  letter  of  his  to  Wake,  dated  the  2nd  October  171 7, 
he  recounts  how  he  had  pressed  on  his  Hampshire  clergy 
in  his  visitation  of  them  their  "  duty  to  our  King." 
"  I  hope,"  he  says,  "  I  was  not  faint  in  my  arguments  or 
in  my  utmost  contempt  for  that  weakelingye  Pretender." 
He  invites  from  the  archbishop  suggestions  how  in  the 
rest  of  his  visitation  he  may  improve  his  charge,  in  what 
directions  he  is  to  enlarge,  what  particular  to  strengthen,. 
The  language  of  the  charge  seems  to  an  ordinary  reader 
already  a  little  inflated.    After  saying  that  George  i. 
will  preserve  them  "  from  all  ye  devices  of  ye  phanatics," 
he  proceeds  ; 


76 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


"  And  when  he  shall  have  run  his  course  late  and  full 
of  yeares  and  honours  those  who  shall  y°  be  alive  have  in 
view  a  Prince  His  Royal  Highness  of  Wales  who  will  rise 
upon  you  as  ye  sun  with  fresh  glory  and  blessings  as  he 
goes  on.  Every  action  will  be  crown'd  with  a  new 
beame  of  lustre  ;  and  as  he  encreases  so  he  will  still 
more  rejoyce  all  those  who  love  as  he  does  our  Constitu- 
tion well  he  studys  and  ye  more  he  knows  of  it  the  more 
he  loves  it,  as  he  himself  ye  more  he  is  known  ye  more  he 
is  and  ever  will  be  belov'd  admir'd  I  had  almost  sayd 
adored  by  all  true  Englishmen." 

Of  the  Princess  of  Wales  he  is  equally  if  not  more 
flattering  : 

"  She  does  not  take  our  religion  upon  consent  merely 
because  she  finds  it  the  state  Settlement  of  the  country, 
she  is  pleas'd  to  examine  diligently  wherein  and  why  it 
differs  from  that  she  hath  seen  profes'd  in  other  coun- 
tries .  .  .  sifts  it  narrowly  to  discern  whether  it  be 
ye  seed  of  ye  good  husbandman  or  the  tares  of  ye 
enemy." 

Trelawney  was  succeeded  at  Winchester  by  the 
Bishop  of  Norwich,  Charles  Trimnell,  a  Whig  and  able 
supporter  of  Ministers  :  but  he  held  Winchester  for  less 
than  two  years,  being  succeeded  in  1723  by  Dr.  Richard 
Willis. 

Wake  was  appealed  to  to  stop  the  performances  of 
certain  stage  players  within  the  boundaries  of  the  old 
archbishop's  palace  at  Canterbury.  A  dramatic  repre- 
sentation, thought  some  of  the  citizens  of  Canterbury,  ill 
befitted  a  spot  which,  if  not  part  of  the  cathedral  pre- 
cincts, was  hallowed  by  associations  such  as  belonged  to 
the  house  where  Primates  had  once  lived.  The  matter 
was  not  free  from  difficulty,  for  apparently  such  rights 
as  the  archbishop  had  in  the  site  in  question  had  been 
demised  to  a  tenant, — a  lady  who  bore  the  honoured 
name  of  Juxon.  Wake  sympathised  with  the  objectors, 
and  wrote  letters  to  Mrs.  Juxon,  strongly  urging  her  to 
avoid  any  outrage  on  his  and  the  objectors'  feelings. 
Mrs.  Juxon  after  some  pressure  yielded.    Through  Dr. 


1737] 


WHISTON 


77 


Sydall,  one  of  the  archbishop's  officials  at  Canterbury,  Mr. 
Jacob,  "  a  worthy  and  learned  gentleman  "  of  Canter- 
bury, and  a  Justice  of  the  Peace,  interviewed  Mr.  Toilet, 
the  master  player,  who  asked  for  a  night  or  two  more, 
and  after  that  they  would  not  act.  To  make  a  "  quiet 
end  of  this  matter,"  Sydall  reports  that  he  gave  leave 
for  two  nights  more.  Sydall  writes  to  the  archbishop 
stating  these  facts,  and  goes  on  : 

"  Since  this  I  have  had  a  message  from  Mrs.  Juxon 
solliciting  me  to  intercede  with  your  Grace  for  but  one 
week  more  after  this."  He  urges  "  that  Mr.  Toilet  and 
his  company  are  very  civil,  sober,  and  orderly  people,  that 
they  have  been  at  great  charge  in  coming  and  bringing 
and  setting  up  their  things,  and  that  they  were  incouraged 
and  invited  by  the  Gentry  to  come  into  these  parts." 
He  goes  on,  "  Since  I  have  stirr'd  in  this  matter  I  find 
that  too  many  of  the  best  people  are  willing  to  think 
more  favourably  of  Players  and  their  occupation  than  the 
Law  does,  and  even  the  Justices  are  not  very  forward  to 
put  it  in  Execution  against  them." 

Wake  incurred  the  serious  displeasure  of  the  eccentric 
William  Whiston.  Whiston  was  a  man  of  learning  and 
research,  his  position  at  this  time  was  that  he  accepted 
the  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity  but  rejected  the  Athanasian 
Creed.  Wake  had  shown  considerable  kindness  to 
Whiston,  but  the  latter  complains  to  the  archbishop  in 
the  following  unmeasured  language  :  "  Since  you  have 
been  removed  from  Bugden  to  Lambeth  your  sentiments 
and  conduct  have  been  diametrically  opposite  to  y' 
former  sentiments  and  conduct."  In  the  course  of  a 
very  long  letter,  Whiston  professes:  "I  shall  sorely 
lament  your  Grace's  Fall  from  your  old  pure  and  peace- 
able Christianity  as  did  ye  Athanasians  ye  Fall  of  ye  great 
Hosius  from  their  moral  and  pernicious  Heresy." 

The  death  of  Robinson,  Bishop  of  London,  in  April 
1723,  caused  a  considerable  move  among  the  bishops. 
Gibson's  promotion  to  London  was,  as  one  of  Wake's 
episcopal  correspondents  writes,  expected  by  everybody. 
Wake  liked  and  esteemed  White  Kennet,  now  Bishop  of 


78 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Peterborough .  They  had  written  on  the  same  side  in 
the  Convocation  controversy,  and  he  now  seems  to  have 
favoured  Kennet's  promotion.  But  the  Prime  Minister 
writes  on  14th  April  1723  to  the  archbishop  : 

"  I  have  received  the  favour  of  your  Grace's  Letter 
concerning  the  vacant  Bishopricks,  and  your  sentiments 
upon  that  subject  .  .  .  His  Majesty  .  .  .  has  declared 
his  intention  that  the  Bishop  of  Bangor  shall  be  trans- 
lated to  the  See  of  Lincoln,  and  that  Dr.  Baker  shall  go  to 
Bangor." 

This  was  carried  out.  Dr.  Reynolds  who,  in  1 721,  had 
succeeded  Hoadly  at  Bangor  being  appointed  to  Lincoln, 
and  Dr.  Baker  becoming  Bishop  of  Bangor. 

In  the  early  years  of  his  archiepiscopate.  Wake  had 
part  in  certain  negotiations,  having  for  their  object  a 
closer  union  between  the  Galilean  Church  and  the  Church 
of  England.  Jansenism  had  considerable  popularity 
among  the  French  during  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  and 
beginning  of  the  eighteenth  centuries  :  and  the  Galilean 
Church  was  not  unwilling  to  soften  off  some  of  the  ex- 
treme doctrines  of  the  papal  creed  in  hope  of  making 
Protestant  converts.  At  the  head  of  the  Sorbonne,  the 
theological  faculty  of  France,  was  Dr.  Lewis  Ellis  Du  Pin, 
a  learned  man,  and  another  member  of  the  faculty  was 
Dr.  Piers,  who,  to  denote  his  extraction  from  an  Irish 
family  of  that  name,  called  himself  de  Girardin.  The 
chaplaincy  to  Lord  Stair,  the  English  ambassador  at 
Paris,  was  held  at  the  time  by  Beau  voir,  a  man  of  en- 
lightened views,  and  a  friend  and  correspondent  of  Arch- 
bishop Wake.  He  had  also  made  the  acquaintance  of 
Du  Pin  and  some  of  his  colleagues  at  the  Sorbonne. 

Pasquies  Quesnel  had  published  Le  Nouveau  Testa- 
ment en  Francais,  hoping  thereby  to  propagate  Jansen- 
ism. It  was  approved  by  Noailles,  Bishop  of  Chalons, 
and  afterwards  Archbishop  of  Paris,  and  made  converts. 
Galilean  leanings  to  what  we  may  call  Modernism  were 
not  at  all  liked  either  by  Louis  xiv.  or  his  friends  the 
Jesuits,  so  they  got  Clement  xi.  to  issue  his  Bull,  known 


1737] 


DU  PIN 


79 


as  Unigenitus,  dated  the  8th  September  171 3.  This  con- 
demned Jansenism  in  general,  and  in  particular  one 
hundred  and  ten  propositions  extracted  from  Quesnel's 
book.  It  reaffirmed  the  Ultra  Montane  faith  without 
modification  or  any  suggestion  of  compromise.  There 
was  much  theological  excitement  in  France.  Noailles 
and  many  eminent  people  in  Church  and  State  refused 
to  receive  it,  and  talked  of  a  General  Council.  As  was 
to  be  expected,  the  serious  ecclesiastical  position  formed 
the  subject  of  talks  between  Beauvoir  and  his  Sorbonne 
friends,  who  were  aware  of  his  friendship  and  corres- 
pondence with  Archbishop^Wake. 

The  immediate  occasion  of  direct  communication 
between  Wake  and  Du  Pin  seems  to  have  been  a  dinner 
party  at  the  Sorbonne,  at  which  Beauvoir  was  present 
in  December  171 8,  and  which  is  thus  mentioned  in  a 
letter  from  Beauvoir  to  Wake,  dated  the  iith  of  that 
month  : 

"  My  Lord, — I  had  the  honour  of  j'-our  Grace's 
letter  of  the  27th  ulto.  last  Sunday  and  therefore  could 
not  answer  it  sooner.  Dr.  Du  Pin,  with  whom  I  dined 
last  Monday,  and  with  the  Syndic  of  the  Sorbonne  and 
2  other  Doctors,"  gave  him,  says  Beauvoir,  some  in- 
formation about  a  Dictionar}^  and  continues,  "  They 
talked  as  if  the  whole  Kingdom  was  to  appeal  to  a 
future  General  Council,  &c.  They  wished  for  a  union 
with  the  Church  of  England  as  the  most  effectual 
means  to  unite  all  the  Western  Churches.  Dr.  Du  Pin 
desired  me  to  give  his  duty  to  your  Grace." 

In  his  reply  to  this  letter.  Wake  requests  Beauvoir 
to  make  his  compliments  to  Du  Pin  as  one  "  by  whose 
labours  he  had  profited  for  many  years." 

This  kindly  message  emboldened  Du  Pin  to  address 
Wake  direct  in  a  letter  of  thanks,  which  winds  up  as 
follows  : 

"  One  thing  I  will  add  with  your  kind  permission, 
viz.,  that  I  earnestly  desire  that  some  way  might  be 
found  of  initiating  a  union  between  the  Anglican  and 


8o 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Gallican  Churches.  We  are  not  so  very  far  separated 
from  one  another  in  most  things  as  to  preclude  the 
possibihty  of  our  being  mutually  reconciled.  Would 
that  all  the  Christians  were  one  fold." 

Wake  replies  on  the  24th  February  171 8.  Not  un- 
naturally, but  perhaps  owing  to  timidity  of  being  too 
positive  in  his  advances,  he  enlarges  upon  the  merits 
of  the  Church  of  England,  its  purity  in  faith,  worship, 
government,  and  discipline.  "  There  are  few  things 
in  it,"  he  says  "  which  even  you  would  desire  to  see 
changed."  "  There  is  nothing  to  mark  us  with  the 
black  mark  of  Heresy."  He  urges  him  to  go  forward 
in  opposing  the  Pope,  and  says,  "  Perhaps  this  may  be 
the  beginning  of  a  new  Reformation,  in  which  not  only 
the  best  Protestants  but  also  a  great  part  of  the  Roman 
Church  may  agree." 

This  rather  important  letter  did  not  stop  at  Du  Pin. 
M.  Patritius  Piers  de  Girardin  comes  on  the  scene. 
He,  about  this  time,  delivered  an  oration  before  the 
faculty,  in  which  he  said  that  the  quarrel  between  the 
Galilean  and  Roman  Churches  might  possibly  induce 
the  Anglican  Church  to  return  into  the  bosom  of  the 
Roman  Church  on  the  Galilean  basis.  Du  Pin  was 
apparently  so  pleased  at  this,  or  at  any  rate  so  struck 
by  it,  that  he  showed  Wake's  letter  of  the  24th  February 
1 71 8  not  only  to  M.  Girardin  but  even  to  Cardinal  De 
Noailles,  Archbishop  of  Paris.  Wake  now  got  a  new 
correspondent,  viz.  Girardin,  and  he  wrote  both  to 
him  and  to  Du  Pin  emphasizing  what  seems  rather  a 
platitude  in  such  a  discussion  that  fundamentals  were 
to  be  distinguished  from  less  important  details.  But 
the  Sorbonne  doctors  had  got  something  to  start  on. 
The  Abbe  Courayer  joined  with  Du  Pin  and  Girardin 
in  the  work  they  had  in  hand,  making  the  subject  of 
Anglican  Orders  the  special  object  of  his  enquiries. 
They  set  to  work  to  draw  up  what  they  called  a  Com- 
monitorinm  de  Modis  ineundoc  pads  inter  Ecclesias 
Anglicanam  el  Gallicanam,  showing  what  was  of  primary 


1737]   DIVINES  ON  THE  XXXIX  ARTICLES  8i 


and  what  of  lesser  obligation.  This  was  to  be  ap- 
proved b}^  Cardinal  de  Noailles,  and  then  sent  to  Wake. 

There  is  a  valuable  epitome  of  this  document  in 
Maclaine's  Appendix  to  Moshe'im's  Ecclesiastical  Hislory, 
which  is  also  set  out  by  Canon  Perry  in  his  Ecclesiastical 
History  in  vol,  iii.  57.  It  is  a  long  document,  with 
what  Maclaine  calls  a  tedious  Preface,  and  we  do  not 
propose  to  repeat  it  at  length.  It  was  read  before  the 
Sorbonne,  approved,  and  sent  to  Archbishop  Wake.  It 
takes  the  form  of  a  comment  on  the  English  Thirty-nine 
Articles.  Perhaps  a  few  points  in  it  may  be  usefully 
adverted  to  here.  Articles  1-5  the  framer  of  the  docu- 
ment accepts  ;  tradition  as  "  confirming  and  illustrat- 
ing "  doctrine  found  in  the  Bible  is  to  be  safeguarded 
in  6.  The  Apocrypha  is  to  be  Deutero-Canonical.  In  10, 
Power  must  mean  potentia  proxima,  since  without  a 
remote  power  of  doing  good  works  it  could  not  be 
imputed.  He  has  little  to  quarrel  with  in  11  and  12, 
Justification  and  Good  Works  taken  together  ;  12  is 
harsh,  but  a  matter  for  theological  discussion  rather 
than  a  term  of  communion.  In  19  he  wishes  to  add 
"  under  lawful  pastors  "  in  the  definition  of  the  Church. 
On  the  Article  as  to  Purgatory,  Du  Pin  observes  "  that 
souls  must  be  purged,  that  is  purified  from  all  defilement 
of  sin,  before  they  are  admitted  to  celestial  bliss  ;  that 
the  Church  of  Rome  doth  not  admit  this  to  be  done 
by  fire,  that  Indulgences  are  onh^  relaxations  or 
remissions  of  temporal  penalties  in  this  life  ;  that 
Roman  Catholics  do  not  worship  the  Cross,  nor  Relics, 
nor  Images,  nor  Saints  before  their  Images,  but  only 
pay  them  an  external  respect  not  of  a  religious 
nature,  which  anyhow  is  a  matter  of  indifference.'' 
Under  Article  25  he  wants  the  5  Sacraments  acknow- 
ledged, whether  instituted  by  Christ  or  not.  He  ap- 
proves 26  and  27.  He  is  willing  to  omit  Transub- 
stantiation  from  28,  and  would  have  that  part  of  it 
run,  "  That  the  Bread  and  Wine  are  reall}^  changed 
into  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  which  last  are  truly 


82 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


and  really  received  by  all,  though  none  but  the 
faithful  derive  any  benefit  from  them."  He  would  have 
Communion  in  both  kinds  left  indifferent.  On  31  he 
is  stiffer,  and  maintains  that  the  Sacrifice  of  Christ  is 
not  only  commemorated  but  continued  in  the  Eucharist, 
and  that  every  communicant  offers  Him  along  with  the 
priest.  On  32  he  will  allow  priests  to  marry  where 
local  Church  Law  allows.  On  36,  English  ordinations 
are  not  to  be  null.  He  denies  the  supremacy  of  the 
Pope.  Lastly,  in  the  discipline  and  worship  of  the 
Church  of  England,  he  sees  nothing  amiss.  The  Roman 
Pontiff  need  not  be  consulted  about  the  union  of  the 
English  and  French  Churches  :  should  he  be  troublesome, 
there  must  be  a  General  Council.  The  bishops  on  both 
sides  must  discuss  details. 

The  project  engrossed  much  attention  in  Paris 
Stanhope  was  over  there  on  special  business,  and  both 
he  and  Lord  Stair  are  said  to  have  been  congratulated 
on  it  by  persons  of  high  political  and  social  position- 
The  Abbe  Du  Bois  was  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs,  and 
he,  as  also  Fleury,  Attorney- General,  were  not  un- 
favourable to  the  negotiations  :  even  the  Regent,  the 
Due  D'Orleans,  was  not  hostile. 

Wake  himself,  with  his  natural  and  acquired  habits 
of  caution,  seems  to  have  got  nervous  by  the  summer 
of  1 718,  and  on  30th  August  we  find  him  writing  to 
Beauvoir  : 

"  My  task  is  pretty  hard  and  I  scarce  know  how  to 
manage  in  this  matter.  To  go  any  further  than  I  have 
done,  even  as  a  Divine  of  the  Church  of  England,  may 
meet  with  censure,  and  as  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
I  cannot  treat  with  these  gentlemen.  This  w"*  only 
expose  me  to  the  censure  of  doing  what  in  my  station 
ought  not  to  be  done  without  the  King's  knowledge. 
.  .  .  I  cannot  tell  what  to  say  to  Dr.  Du  Pin.  If  he 
thinks  we  are  to  take  their  direction  what  to  retain 
and  what  to  give  up,  he  is  utterly  mistaken  ;  .  .  .  they 
may  depend  upon  it  I  shall  always  account  our  Church 

*  Biog.  Brit.,  4090t 


1737] 


HIS  VIEW  ON  REUNION 


83 


to  stand  upon  an  equal  foot  with  theirs  ;  and  that  we 
are  no  more  to  receive  laws  from  them  than  to  impose 
any  on  them.  In  short,  the  Church  of  England  is  free, 
is  orthodox.  She  has  a  plenary  authority  within  her- 
self, and  has  no  need  to  recur  to  any  other  Church  to 
direct  her  what  to  retain  and  what  to  do.  If  they 
mean  to  deal  with  us  they  must  lay  down  this  for  the 
foundation,  that  we  are  to  deal  with  one  another  on 
equal  terms." 

Wake  also  wrote  an  important  letter  to  Du  Pin  and 
another  to  Girardin.  These  letters  were  in  Latin  :  the 
Archbishop  seems  to  have  thought  the  worthies  of  the 
Sorbonne  were  lacking  in  information  as  to  portions  of 
the  English  formularies,  and  he  also  felt  safe  in  stirring 
up  their  anti-papal  ideas. 

Of  this  letter  to  Du  Pin  he  writes  to  Beauvoir  : 

"  I  have  described  the  method  of  making  bishops 
in  our  Church.  I  believe  he  (Du  Pin)  will  be  equally 
surprised  and  *  pleased  with  it.  .  .  .  The  rest  of  my 
letters  both  to  him  and  to  Dr.  Piers  (Girardin)  is  a 
venture  which  I  know  not  how  they  will  take,  to  con- 
vince them  in  breaking  off  from  the  Pope,  and  going 
one  step  further  than  they  have  yet  done  in  their 
opinion  of  his  authority,  so  as  to  leave  him  merely  a 
primacy  of  place  and  honour,  and  that  merely  by 
ecclesiastical  authority,  as  he  was  once  bishop  of  the 
Imperial  City." 

Wake's  own  view  of  a  possible  reunion  and  the 
basis  of  it  is  well  summed  up  in  another  letter  of  his 
to  Beauvoir : 

"  If  we  could  once  divide  the  Gallican  Church  from 
the  Roman,  a  reformation  in  other  matters  would 
follow  as  a  matter  of  course.  The  scheme  that  to  me 
seems  most  likely  to  prevail  is  to  agree  in  the  independ- 
ence (in  all  matters  of  authority)  of  every  National 
Church  on  any  others  and  their  right  to  determine  all 
matters  that  arise  within  themselves  ;  and  for  points 
of  doctrine,  to  agree  as  far  as  possible  in  all  articles  of 
any  moment  (as  in  effect  we  already  do  or  easily  may)  : 
and  for  other  matters  to  allow  a  difference  till  God  shall 

1 


84 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


bring  us  to  a  union  in  these  also.  One  only  thing 
sh"*  be  provided  tor  to  purge  out  of  the  public  offices 
of  the  Church  such  things  as  hinder  a  perfect  com- 
munion in  the  Service  of  the  Church,  so  that  whenever 
any  come  from  us  to  them  or  from  them  to  us  we  may 
all  join  together  in  prayers  and  the  holy  Sacraments 
with  each  other." 

Unfortunately  for  the  projected  union,  when 
Wake's  letters  reached  Paris,  Du  Pin  was  dead.  More- 
over, by  this  time  Rome  was  putting  her  foot  down. 
The  Jesuits  spread  a  report  that  Cardinal  de  Noailles 
and  the  Jansenists  were  truckling  to  Heretics.  De 
Girardin  was  sent  for  to  Court  and,  under  threat  from 
the  Abbe  Du  Bois  of  being  lodged  in  the  Bastille,  had  to 
give  up  all  Wake's  letters  and  his  own.  Du  Bois,  who 
wanted  to  curry  favour  enough  at  the  Vatican  to  get  a 
Cardinal's  hat,  sent  on  the  letters  to  the  authorities 
there,  who  sternly  forbad  any  further  negotiations. 

Du  Bois  got  his  red  hat,  and  Pope  Clement  xi., 
having  read  Wake's  letters,  declared  it  was  a  pity  the 
author  of  such  profound  letters  was  not  a  member  of 
the  Roman  Church.  And  this  was  the  end  of  the 
negotiations. 

But  the  interest  of  Galilean  Divines  in  the  Church  of 
England,  and  their  esteem  for  and  admiration  of  the 
learning  and  wisdom  of  its  then  Primate  did  not  drop 
with  the  lapse  of  the  reunion  negotiations.  Among 
those  who  had  been  working  with  Du  Pin  and  de  Gir- 
ardin was  Dr.  Peter  Francis  Courayer,  a  Benedictine 
and  Canon  Regular  and  Principal  Librarian  of  the 
Cathedral  Church  of  St.  Genevieve  at  Paris.  Courayer 's 
attention  had  been  specially  drawn  to  the  validity  of 
Anglican  orders,  or  rather  to  the  attacks  on  such  validity 
made  by  Romish  controversialists.  One  Renaudot 
had  written  against  their  validity  a  work  which  was 
published  posthumously,  and  to  which  Courayer  con- 
templated a  reply.  Having  heard  how  gracious  the 
English  archbishop   had  been  to  his  friends  at  the 


1737]     FRIENDSHIP  WITH  COURAYER  85 


Sorbonne,  Courayer  on  the  23rd  July  1721  addressed  a 
Latin  letter  to  Wake.  The  great  object  of  his  inquiries 
was  the  consecration  of  Bishop  Barlow  of  Nag's  Head 
fame.  If  the  "  actus  "  of  this  could  be  found  all  would 
be  well.  It  is  not,  says  he  in  the  Canterbury  Registry, 
"  sed  forte  apud  Ecclesiam  aliquam  e  suffraganeis  con- 
secratus  est  Barlous  et  in  tabulis  hujus  Ecclesiae  Actus 
occurret."  Wake  was  no  idler  :  the  subject  was 
one  he  had  studied  and  had  near  his  heart.  The 
"  actus  "  could  not  be  found  :  but  he  sent  the  father  a 
Latin  letter  of  no  less  than  twelve  sheets  closely  written 
giving  a  satisfactory  account  of  the  certainty  of  Barlow's 
consecration.  The  French  father  and  the  arch- 
bishop became  close  friends  and  correspondents.  In 
the  following  six  years  Wake  wrote  to  Courayer  no  less 
than  forty-five  letters — many  of  them  lengthy,  learned, 
and  laborious. 

The  first  Latin  letter  about  Barlow  was  supple- 
mented by  an  English  one  written  in  November  1721, 
from  which  a  good  idea  of  how  the  archbishop  dealt 
with  his  correspondent  may  be  gleaned.  In  it  he  says, 
referring  to  a  letter  from  Courayer  : 

"  I  have  been  ever  since  I  received  it  taken  up  in 
making  new  enquiries  and  further  searches  to  satisfie 
your  new  demands  upon  me.  The  time  I  have  for 
anything  of  this  kind  is  so  very  little  that  I  am  forced 
to  go  on  slowly  in  these  matters,  and  spend  a  week  in 
doing  that  which,  were  it  not  for  my  other  engagements, 
might  be  dispatched  in  a  day.  ...  I  cannot  but  look 
on  this  whole  controversy  as  a  quarrell  sought  against 
us  by  those  of  our  own  country  who  differ  from  us  in 
other  matters,  ,  .  ,  I  am  sorry  to  say  our  English 
Priests  have  shewn  themselves  extremely  faulty  in  the 
management  of  this  cause.  ...  I  may  venture  to 
affirm  that  the  Episcopal  succession  has  nowhere  been 
better  preserved  than  in  the  Church  of  England,  nor 
do  I  believe  any  Church  in  the  world  can  support  it 
with  more  ample  or  authentic  Records  than  we  have 
done  and  can  do." 

[     This  is  in  spite  of  what  Wake  calls  "  several  mis- 


86 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


fortunes  in  this  particular."  Mary,  he  suggests,  had 
tampered  with  "  Acts  "  of  Henry  viii.  and  Edward  vi. 
In  the  Commonwealth  "  a  new  desolation  "  came  upon 
our  public  records.  The  archbishop's  registers  and 
the  records  of  Canterbury  had  suffered  in  the  Fire  of 
London  and  another  fire  at  Canterbury  about  1690.  He 
then  shows  how  he  had  searched  about  Barlow  : 

"  Mr.  S.,  Subdean  of  Exeter,  is  returned  to  my  house  : 
he  called  at  Wells  in  his  return  hither  and  made  the  best 
enquiries  he  could  about  Bishop  Barlow.  His  Register 
was  wholly  destroyed  in  the  ravage  made  of  that  church, 
as  I  suppose  in  the  Duke  of  Monmouth's  Rebellion  :  so 
that  there  is  no  hope  of  anything  from  thence.  I  have 
the  like  accounts  from  St.  "Asaph  and  St.  David's.  At 
Chichester  his  register  remains,  but  has  nothing  in  it  but 
institutions  to  benefices  and  other  the  like  Episcopal 
Acts.  He  was  burj'ed  in  his  Cathedral  at  Chichester  : 
but  no  epitaph  of  him  remains  from  whence  to  gather 
any  account  of  him." 

Wake  details  further  inquiries  he  had  made  of  the 
Dean  of  Durham,  Mr.  Strj-pe,  and  the  Bishop  of  Peter- 
borough. Courayer  had  some  idea  of  writing  a  new 
History  of  the  Reformation,  and  had  asked  for  informa- 
tion on  other  points  affecting  the  English  Church  ;  and 
Wake  winds  up  his  letter  by  referring  to  Strype's  then 
recently  published  Ecclesiastical  Memorials  of  Henry 
VIII.,  Edward  VI.,  and  Mary,  to  his  Annals  of  Elizabeth, 
and  Lives  of  Parker  Grindal  and  Whitgift. 

On  20th  April  (O.S.)  1722,  Wake  writes  from 
Lambeth  : 

"  I  am  still  of  opinion  that  if  God  shd  continue  3'ou  in 
life  and  health  it  wd  be  an  usefuU  work  out  of  the  severall 
histories  that  have  been  published  of  our  Reformation  to 
draw  up  one  Compleat  History  that  might  fully  suffice 
for  all.  .  .  .  I  shall  be  glad  to  hear  that  the  Codex  of  our 
Ecclesiastical  Laws  which  I  took  the  liberty  to  send  you 
has  come  to  your  hands.  You  will  see  there  the  Con- 
cordia Sacordotii  et  Imperii  in  our  English  Church,  that 
we  are  still  under  the  same  Canonical  Discipline  and  Epis- 


1737]       THE  ANGLICAN  SUCCESSION 


87 


copal  Government  we  ever  were  ;  and  have  done  nothing 
more  than  to  lay  aside  such  Canons  and  Constitutions  as 
we  have  found  to  be  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God,  the  laws 
of  the  Realm,  or  the  Prerogative  of  the  Crown.  The  rest 
even  those  that  were  used  before  the  Reformation  still 
continuing  in  force  with  us.  So  that  our  succession  is  as 
uninterrupted  in  the  discipline  of  our  Church  as  in  that 
of  our  Episcopacy,  in  which  there  never  has  been  that  we 
know  the  least  breach." 

Wake's  letters  give  a  picture,  and  it  is  a  pleasing 
picture  of  himself.  He  writes  again  to  Courayer  on  the 
9th  December  1721 .  After  referring  to  the  latter  being 
unable  to  get  permission  from  the  French  Church 
authorities  to  publish  the  book  he  had  in  hand.  Wake 
proceeds  : 

"  I  cannot  but  own  myself  somewhat  scandalised  at 
this  procedure.  What  are  these  men  afraid  of?  Do 
the}^  apprehend  that  our  Episcopal  successions  and  con- 
secrations should  be  made  appear  to  be  better  founded 
than  they  thought  it  had  been  ?  But  why  shd  they  not 
desire  if  possible  to  be  convinced  of  this  ?  Why  shd 
they  not  wish  us  to  be  lesse  irregular  than  they  supposed 
us  to  be  ?  .  .  .  God  knows  that  we  are  as  carefull 
to  continue  the  true  succession  of  our  Episcopacy  and 
value  ourselves  as  much  upon  it  as  any  in  the  Roman 
Church.  He  knows  that  we  have  done  it  ;  and  to  Him 
we  leave  it  to  judge  between  us  whether  this  stone  of 
offence  shd  not  be  removed  and  good  men  satisfied  what 
the  true  state  of  the  matter  is,  and  that  there  is  no 
obstacle  on  this  account  to  our  union  if  other  points 
could  be  adjusted. 

"  Our  good  friend  the  Abbe  Girardin  being  still  here 
I  have  desired  him  to  take  care  to  get  Mr.  Strype's 
Memoirs  and  Anthony  Wood's  Athence  Oxon  for  you. 
I  cannot  commend  either  of  these  as  just  histories  to  you, 
but  you  will  meet  many  things  in  both  that  are  not  easy 
to  be  found  elsewhere  ;  and  must  make  your  own  use  as 
you  have  occasion  of  them.  .  .  .  While  the  Abbe  has  had 
the  opportunity  of  seeing  the  confirmation  of  i  bishop 
and  the  consecration  of  2.  When  he  returns  he  will  give 
you  a  full  account  of  what  he  observed  in  both. 

"  I  wish,  my  good  father,  I  were  more  worthy  of 
7 


88 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


your  good  opinion  than  I  fear  I  am.  Report  magnifies 
men's  characters  at  a  distance  :  but  few  answer  the  ex- 
pectations which  from  thence  is  raised  from  them.  I 
blesse  God  I  know  my  own  mediocrity  ;  and  am  not 
exalted  in  any  opinion  of  myselfe.  God  has  given  me 
an  honest  mind  ;  desirous  to  act  with  integrity  in  every- 
thing, and  having  long  conversed  with  men  of  all  persua- 
sions and  found  some  to  value  in  almost  every  way,  I 
have  learnt  not  only  to  bear  with  those  who  differ  from 
me,  but  notwithstanding  any  such  differences  to  love 
them  ;  to  think  charitably  of  them,  and  to  hope  that  a 
God  of  infinite  love  and  goodnesse  will  pitty  and  accept 
of  us  all.  If  in  this  I  am  mistaken  I  am  sure  I  err  on  the 
best  side  ;  and  as  those  thoughts  shall  never  make  me 
either  negligent  in  the  search  for  what  is  agreeable  to 
God's  will  or  prejudiced  against  it  tho'  never  so  contrary 
to  my  present  notion  ;  so  I  am  persuaded  that  by  keep- 
ing up  such  a  universal  charit}'  in  my  mind  for  those  who 
in  the  integrity  of  their  hearts  differ  from  me,  I  shall  be 
always  the  best  prepared  to  submit  to  a  reasonable  con- 
viction and  to  obtain  God's  pardon  for  any  involuntary 
errors  I  may  after  all  happen  to  continue  in.  Cassander, 
Erasmus,  Grotius,  and  the  like  writers  are,  I  freely  own, 
my  great  favourites  :  but  as  I  deserve  not  to  be  compared 
with  them  in  anything  but  the  like  Christian  and  chari- 
table dispositions,  so  neither  wd  I  be  thought  so  vain  as 
once  to  think  myselfe  (in  learning  or  capacity)  like  to 
them.  My  picture  was  some  time  ago  finished  at  the 
desire  of  some  persons  :  the  plate  is  entirely  worn  out 
and  the  copies  of  it  no  longer  to  be  had.  I  sent  m}^  last 
by  our  Friend  to  you  ;  and  have  not  one  more  for  myselfe 
or  any  other  remaining.  .  .  . 

"  I  have  added  a  very  few  strictures  on  the  2  sheets 
sent  me  of  your  book,  which  I  do,  without  compliment, 
not  so  much  approve  as  admire,  when  I  consider  it  as  the 
work  of  a  stranger  to  our  Constitution.  The  error  con- 
cerning the  restitution  of  temporalities  onty  after  con- 
secration is  what  some  of  our  best  writers  have  run  into. 
The  practice  is  no  other  at  this  time,  nor  I  believe  has 
been  in  the  memory  of  man.  It  is  founded  upon  the 
Statute  law  of  this  realm  ;  and  I  am  confident  you 
might  venture  it  without  danger  of  being  reproved  for  it. 
But  I  wd  not  have  Truth  itself  vindicated  with  that 
which  is  not  true,  tho'  I  were  sure  it  wd  never  be  dis- 
covered :  and  by  comparing  the  dates  of  our  bishops' 


1737]       REFORMATION  AUTHORITIES  89 


consecrations  as  they  stand  in  our  Fasti  published  by  Le 
Neve,  which  I  see  you  have  with  the  writs  in  Rymer  for 
the  restitution  of  temporaUties,  you  will  find  many  in- 
stances of  bishops  who  have  had  them  by  Grace  from  our 
Princes  before  they  were  ever  consecrated  bishops." 

In  another  letter,  dated  29th  October  1722,  Wake 
gives  rather  amusingly  his  opinion  of  the  authorities 
for  a  History  of  the  Reformation  : 

"  Strype  is  honest  tho'  not  entertaining  and  always 
writes  upon  good  authority.  Bishop  Burnet's  records 
are  faithfully  collected  and  his  History  must  be  tryed  by 
them  :  Heylin  is  rash  and  often  mistaken  :  Fuller  not  to 
be  relyed  upon  :  Collier  writes  all  for  a  party,  but  I  have 
not  read  enough  of  him  to  judge  of  his  care." 

We  have  given  Wake's  letters  above  because  we 
think  a  man  is  best  portrayed  historically  in  and  by  his 
own  words.  Another  letter  from  Croydon  House,  dated 
9th  July  1 724,  gives  Wake's  views  on  points  about  which 
Courayer  had  asked  him  and  which  are  of  public  interest 
at  the  present  day. 

After  saying  his  eyes  had  been  so  indisposed  with  a 
rheum  that  he  could  not  for  a  long  while  read  or  write,  he 
says  : 

"  The  Licence  granted  by  Archbishop  Grindal's 
Vicar-General  to  a  Scot  Presbyterian  to  officiate  here  in 
England,  I  freely  own  it  is  not  what  I  shd  have  approved 
of,  yet  dare  not  condemn.  I  blesse  God  that  I  was  born 
and  have  been  bred  in  an  Episcopal  Church  ;  which  I  am 
convinced  has  been  the  Government  established  in  the 
Christian  Church  from  the  very  time  of  the  Apostles. 
But  I  shd  be  unwilling  to  affirm  that  where  the  ministry 
is  not  Episcopal  there  is  no  Church  nor  any  true  adminis- 
tration of  the  Sacraments.  And  very  many  there  are 
among  us  who  are  zealous  for  Episcopacy,  yet  dare  not  go 
so  far  as  to  annul  the  ordinances  of  God  performed  by 
any  other  ministry.  See  for  this  in  Bishop  Andrew's 
Opuscula  his  letters  to  Du  Moulin.  You  will  there  find 
one  of  the  most  tenacious  asserters  of  the  Episcopal 
Government,  nevertheless  far  from  unchurching  all  the 
other  Reformed  Churches  for  want  of  it.    And  in  the  case 


90 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


you  mention  who  can  say  how  far  a  Bishop  may  have 
power  to  Hcence  a  person  not  rightl}^  ordained  to  olBciate 
in  the  Church  committed  to  his  jurisdiction.  In  the 
meantime  you  know  your  Schoolmen  have  been  far 
from  censuring  Presbyterian  ordinations  ;  and  3'et  their 
opinions  had  no  effect  to  prejudice  the  Episcopacy  of 
your  Church  in  which  tiie\^  hved.  And  should  I  (errone- 
ously) consider  such  an  ordination  in  some  circum- 
stances valid,  yet  I  do  not  see  how  that  wd  affect  my  own 
orders,  which  I  must  always  prefer  exceedingly  before  the 
other.  At  present  our  constitution  is  otherwise  settled  ; 
nor  can  any  archbishop  or  bishop  licence  any  man  to 
officiate  or  administer  the  holy  Sacraments,  especially 
that  of  the  Blessed  Eucharist,  who  is  not  by  an  episcopal 
ordination  qualified  for  it." 

Later  on  he  answers  Courayer's  query  about  the 
Sacrifice  in  the  Eucharist  : 

"  To  your  other  point  in  j'-our  letter  about  the 
Sacrifice  of  the  Masse,  I  will  in  one  word  tell  you  what 
I  take  to  have  been  all  along  the  sense  of  our  Church 
concerning  it.  We  have  from  the  beginning  of  the 
Reformation  utterly  deny'd  any  such  propitiatory 
sacrifice  as  the  Council  of  Trent  establishes  in  it.  For 
what  you  call  a  commemorative  or  representative 
sacrifice,  tho'  we  think  those  terms  very  improper,  we 
have  never  that  I  know  of  made  any  other  exception 
against  it  ;  and  some  of  our  writers  have  been  over 
zealous  in  their  assertion  of  it.  As  to  the  change 
made  in  our  Communion  office  in  the  second  book  of 
King  Edward  vi.  from  that  of  the  first,  I  have  two 
observations  to  offer  to  your  consideration  with  relation 
to  this  point,  (i)  That  Bucer,  who  was  chiefly  con- 
sulted with  by  Cranmer  with  regard  to  those  changes 
in  all  his  observations  upon  that  first  form  of  Edward  vi., 
nowhere  that  I  remember  makes  any  exception  against 
such  a  sacrifice  as  you  mention  or  offers  any  change  to 
be  made  on  that  account.  (See  his  Scripta  Anglicana 
fol.)  The  other  observation  I  would  make  as  to  that 
matter  is,  that  in  the  year  1551  Cranmer  published  his 
work  against  Bishop  of  Winchester  upon  the  subject 
of  this  holy  Sacrament.  His  last  part  is  entirely  upon 
the  subject  of  the  sacrifice.  In  this  he  fully  rejects 
and  confutes  the  doctrine  of  a  propitiatory  sacrifice 


1737]  RE-ORDINATION  OF  PRESBYTERIANS  91 


in  the  Eucharist,  but  for  the  other  he  excepts  not 
either  against  the  words  or  the  thing.  He  allows  of 
Peter  Lombard's  explication  of  the  Sacrifice  there 
offered,  which,  if  I  remember  aright,  is  much  the  same  as 
your  letter  expresses.  Now  the  Common  Prayer  Book 
of  Edward  vi.  was  at  that  very  time  under  review.  It 
was  published  the  next  year,  1552.  Cranmer  had 
the  main  hand  in  it  ;  and  it  is  not  likely  that  he  had 
any  regard  in  the  changes  that  were  made  to  any 
commemorative  Sacrifice  ;  against  which  in  his  own 
book,  written  about  the  same  time  upon  that  very 
subject,  he  made  no  exception. 

"  These  books  I  have  in  my  Library  at  Lambeth, 
and  I  hope  you  have  them  in  yours.  But  as  I  am  now 
in  the  country  and  depend  much  upon  my  memory  ; 
so  I  flatter  myselfe  you  will  excuse  me  if  I  make  any 
mistake  by  trusting  to  it.  As  for  myselfe  I  freely  own 
I  have  no  notion  of  any  real  sacrifice  that  is  only 
commemorative.  And  for  that  reason  do  not  concern 
myselfe  but  for  your  satisfaction  in  that  way  of  speak- 
ing at  all." 

There  is  another  letter  of  Wake's  bearing  on  re- 
ordination  of  Presbyterians.  One  Horner  was  a  native 
of  Switzerland  and  had  received  Presbyterian  orders 
there.  He  acted  in  Paris  as  chaplain  to  Sir  Luke 
Schaub,  with  whom  he  came  over  to  England.  He 
desired  to  qualify  himself  for  clerical  work  in  the  British 
Isles.  Wake  writes  of  him  under  date  14th  January  1722: 

"  I  have  ordained  Mr.  Horner  both  Deacon  and 
Priest  and  thereby  received  him  into  the  ministry  of 
the  Church  of  England.  This  is  a  work  that  gives  the 
most  offence  of  any  to  the  other  Reformed  Churches  ; 
but  I  must  agree  with  you  that  I  know  no  government 
older  than  Calvin's  time,  but  what  was  Episcopal  in  the 
Church  of  Christ." 

Courayer's  great  work,  called  A  Dissertation  on  the 
Validity  of  the  Ordination  of  the  English  and  of  the  Succes- 
sion of  the  Bishops  of  the  Anglican  Church,  was  published 
in  1723.  A  single  quotation  may  be  made  from  the 
English  translation  of  it  : 

**  The  validity  of  the  English  ordinations  stands 


92 


WILLIAM  WAKE        -  [1716- 


upon  the  strongest  evidence,  has  the  most  authenticated 
acts,  the  most  express  testimonies,  the  most  uncon- 
tested facts  to  oppose  to  fable  and  forgery,  to  mistaken 
reasonings  and  unauthenticated  deductions  ;  the 
Roman  custom  of  re-ordaining  Enghsh  priests  '  is 
contrary  to  all  the  received  maxims  of  the  Church  in 
the  matter  of  re-ordination,  and  it  is  founded  upon 
opinions  that  are  abandoned  and  upon  doubts  that 
have  no  foundation.'  " 

But  the  task  that  Courayer  was  engaged  on  was  doubt- 
less known  to  the  Roman  authorities  before  1723.  He 
knew  he  was  in  some  peril, and  his  friend  at  Lambeth  knew 
it  too,  and  was  ready  to  give  him  asylum  when  needed. 

On  19th  May  (O.S.)  1722,  Wake  writes  : 

"  As  for  your  public  affairs,  I  trust  in  God  that  He 
will  not  only  defend  the  truth,  but  protect  those  He  is 
pleased  to  make  use  of  in  the  defence  of  it.  Shd  the 
case  be  otherwise,  M.  de  G.  (Giaradin)  will  tell  you  that 
we  are  not  here  so  narrow  either  in  our  charity  or  our 
inclinations  as  not  to  know  how  to  value  such  men 
as  you  are,  tho'  they  still  continue  to  differ  from  us. 
We  hope,  notwithstanding  our  differences,  to  be  together 
united  in  the  glorious  fellowship  of  the  Church  trium- 
phant .  Why  may  we  not  be  as  well  united  in  the  Church  ? 
A  Catholic  love  and  spirit  may  well  consist  with  a 
variety  of  judgment  in  respect  to  the  doctrines  of 
Christ.  In  all  essentials  we  are  agreed.  I  am  sure 
had  we  liked  at  any  time  within  the  first  five  centuries, 
the  subscription  of  the  Nicene  and  Constantinopolitan 
Creed  wd  have  entitled  us  to  the  common  name  and 
title  of  Catholic  Christians  ;  were  it  not  for  the  love 
of  dominion  of  the  Court  of  Rome  the  case  might  be  the 
same  now.  However,  I  will  never  reckon  him  estranged 
from  the  Church  of  Christ  here  whom  I  hope  and  am 
persuaded  He  will  receive  hereafter.  My  principles 
are  Catholic  ;  my  heart  is  the  same  ;  and  my  love  and 
prayers  shall  be  so  too.  If  I  live,  and  any  unhappy 
accident  drives  any  of  you  hither,  I  will  endeavour  to 
shew  you  that  I  do  not  in  vain  pretend  to  this  character. 
I  may  err,  but  I  will  not  be  a  heretic.  I  may,  and  do 
separate  from  the  Pope  and  his  tyranny  ;  yet  for  all 
that  I  neither  am  nor  will  be  a  schismatic.    In  this 


J 


1737] 


COURAYER  IN  DANGER 


93 


disposition  I  live,  and  if  in  this  disposition  I  die,  I  shall 
not  fear  any  anathemas  from  the  Vatican  fulminated 
against  me.  To  yourselfe  and  all  charitable  and  good 
Christians  I  am  and  will  ever  prof  esse  myself e, — A 
faithful  and  loving  friend  and  brother  in  Christ  Jesus, 

"  W.  Cantuar." 

But  by  1726  Courayer's  position  had  become  full 
of  risk,  and  Archbishop  Wake  writes  to  him  on  12th  Sep- 
tember in  that  year  a  letter  in  which,  after  referring  to  a 
report  of  the  Father's  papers  having  been  seized,  he  says  : 

"  I  can  hardly  think  the  assembly  of  your  Bishops 
will  venture  for  the  sake  of  gratifying  some  men's 
private  resentments  against  you  to  determine  a  point 
of  so  great  moment  as  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacrifice,  and 
particularly  to  carry  it  to  that  extreme  which  you  shew 
your  Church  never  yet  to  have  defined  and  some  of 
your  greatest  Divines  not  to  admit  of." 

He  concludes  his  letter  : 

"  My  good  Father,  take  all  the  care  you  can  of 
yourselfe  and  your  papers.  Go  on  steadily  in  the  course 
you  are  in.  God,  I  trust,  will  preserve  you  from  the 
hands  of  your  enemies  and  make  you  a  happy  instru- 
ment of  bringing  our  two  Churches  somewhat  nearer 
to  a  Union  than  they  have  hitherto  been.  Should 
your  good  endeavours  herein  expose  you  to  any  such 
dangers  as  should  oblige  you  even  to  leave  your  own 
country,  you  may  depend  upon  a  safe  and  honourable 
retreat  here  ;  and  that  without  changing  your  com- 
munion or  renouncing  any  principles  which  you  think 
to  be  true,  tho'  different  from  ours.  .  .  . 

"  If  you  need  any  good  offices  in  France,  I  have  again 
bespoke  Mr.  Robinson's  kindnesse  to  you  while  he  is 
attending  the  Court  at  Fontainebleau.  You  may 
safely  apply  to  Mr.  Tyrwhit,  our  Ambassador's  chaplain, 
whom  Mr.  Robinson  entirely  trusts  and  assures  me  you 
and  I  may  securely  trust  with  any  thing  we  desire  to 
have  done  by  him.  Farewell,  my  good  friend,  and 
continue  to  love  him  who  is  with  the  truest  esteem, 
Reverend  Father,  your  truly  affectionate  friend, 

"  W.  Cant." 

"  Croydon,  Sept.  21,  (O.S.)  1726." 


94 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


In  November  and  December  of  the  same  year  there 
are  further  letters  repeating  the  offer  of  a  refuge  : 

"  If  you  are  in  danger  you  know  where  you  may  be 
not  only  in  safety  but  respected  as  you  deserve.  As  to 
what  you  piropose  in  your  letter,  I  cannot  direct  you 
better  than  to  take  Mr.  Robinson's  advice  and  by  him 
Mr.  Walpole's,  whether  you  shd  present  your  book  (I 
mean  both  this  Defence,  &c.,  and  your  former  Disserta- 
tion) to  the  King,  Prince,  and  Princesse.  If  they  think 
it  fit  to  be  done  you  will  pray  Mr.  Walpole's  favour  to 
do  it.  He  is  coming  speedily  into  England,  and  will  be 
your  best  friend  at  our  Court  should  you  have  any 
occasion  for  their  favour.  I  would  not  have  you  by 
any  means  suffer  upon  account  of  what  you  have  written 
in  this  controversie,  and  I  hope  you  will  not.  If  you 
should,  it  is  no  harm  to  think  beforehand  whither  to 
retire  for  safety." 

Wake  seems  to  have  offered  to  help  Courayer's 
publishing  expenses.    On  7th  December  he  writes  : 

"  I  do  not  pretend  to  merit  anything  of  you  by  my 
offers  of  contributing  towards  any  new  corrections  that 
may  be  made  in  or  additions  to  your  books.  ...  I 
hope  you  will  meet  with  no  occasion  for  either  assist- 
ance or  protection,  that  you  will  continue  free  and  un- 
disturbed in  your  present  retirement  from  the  world. 
But  if  it  should  be  otherwise,  and  you  shd  be  forced 
under  your  doubtful  circumstances  to  seek  a  refuge  else- 
where, it  may  not  be  altogether  uselesse  to  you  that  you 
know  whither  to  go  ;  and  enjoy  both  the  liberty  of 
your  conscience  and  a  provision  against  the  danger  of 
want  in  a  strange  country." 

The  Mr.  Robinson  referred  to  in  the  above  letters 
was  afterwards  Sir  Thomas  Robinson,  whom  Newcastle 
made  leader  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  1 754.  He  was 
a  failure  in  that  position,  having  been  too  long  resident 
as  a  diplomat  abroad.  He  was  made  Lord  Grantham 
in  1760.  He  was  at  the  time  of  these  letters  Secretary 
to  Horace  Walpole. 

Courayer,  though  invited  to  find  a  home  in  England, 
had  expressed  doubts  whether  it  was  a  good  country 


1737] 


AN  AGED  ARCHBISHOP 


95 


for  a  religious  man  to  reside  in.  In  his  letter  last  quoted 
the  archbishop  deals  with  this  point,  and  also  gives  an 
interesting  picture  of  his  own  life  : 

"  Your  observation,"  says  he  to  Courayer,  "  of  our 
country  with  respect  to  religion  is  but  too  true.  Our 
divisions  are  many  ;  and  the  liberty  taken  by  men  in 
treating  of  matters  of  faith  and  doctrine  is  much  beyond 
what  either  our  laws  permit  or  it  were  to  be  wished  our 
government  shd  suffer.  .  .  .  All  I  can  say  is  that  no 
care  is  wanting  among  our  clergy  to  defend  the  Christian 
Faith  against  all  assaults,  and  that  I  believe  no  age  or 
nation  has  produced  more  or  better  writings  against 
Atheists,  Deists,  Socinians,  Arians,  and  all  other  the 
like  libertines  than  our  country  has  done  and  continues 
daily  to  do.  And  for  such  as  separate  from  the  estab- 
lished Church,  I  may  boldly  say  nothing  of  argument 
has  been  offered  by  them  to  justify  their  separation 
that  has  not  been  often  and  fully  answered  by  us. 
This  is  all  we  can  do  :  Iniquity  in  practice  God  knows 
abounds  too  much  among  us,  chiefly  in  the  two  extremes, 
the  highest  and  lowest  ranks  of  men.  The  middle  sort 
are  serious  and  religious.  .  .  .  For  myself  I  live  almost 
a  monastic  life.  I  have  a  large  and  numerous  family, 
and  I  keep  it  under  the  best  regulation  I  can.  We  have 
the  service  of  God  within  ourselves  and  that  in  public 
in  my  Chappell  and  house  four  times  a  day.  We  live 
orderly  and  peaceably  together.  And  tho'  the  necessity 
of  business  draws  a  great  number  of  persons  to  me,  3^et 
I  reduce  even  that  as  much  as  possible  to  certain  times  ; 
and  then  eat  openly  with  my  friends  two  da3''s  in  the 
week.  To  the  Court  I  seldome  go,  save  when  obliged  to 
attend  my  duty  either  in  the  public  or  cabinet  Councills. 
And  when  in  parliament  time  I  am  rather  faulty  in  not 
going  so  often  as  I  should  to  it  than  in  attending  con- 
stantly upon  it.  So  that  I  use  my  best  endeavours  to 
live  clear  of  the  world  and  dye  by  degrees  to  it.  My 
age  and  infirmities  (being  now  ready  to  enter  on  my 
70th  year)  admonish  me  to  look  upon  myselfe  as  a 
citizen  of  another  Countr}^  and  read3^  to  go  from  hence 
to  it.  Your  prayers  for  a  happy  passage  to  it  will  be  a 
seasonable  and  friendly  help  added  to  my  own.  In 
return  I  shall  not  be  wanting  to  wish  you  all  happiness 
in  your  longer  pilgrimage  upon  earth.  And  tho'  we  go 
by  somewhat  different  paths,  yet   we  do  in  effect 


96 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


pursue  the  same  road,  so  I  trust  we  shall  meet  again  at 
our  journey's  end." 

Courayer  was  in  high  esteem  with  Enghsh  divines, 
and  the  University  of  Oxford  conferred  on  him  the 
degree  of  D.C.L.  in  August  17271  ;  but  the  French 
dignitaries  were  against  him.  Cardinal  de  Noailles  was 
no  longer  to  be  counted  a  friend  of  his  cause.  The 
Bishop  of  Marseilles  and  other  prelates  were  opposed 
to  him.  So  in  1728  he  took  refuge  under  Wake's  wing 
in  England.  He  was  kindly  received,  the  Crown  gave 
him  a  pension.  He  died  a  Roman  Catholic  in  1776  at 
the  patriarchal  age  of  ninety-five,  and  is  buried  in  the 
cloisters  of  Westminster  Abbey. 

The  last  letter  in  the  correspondence  gives  us  an 
even  later  picture  of  the  venerable  Primate.  Under 
date  31st  Januar}^  1727  he  writes  : 

"  I  have  been  much  out  of  order  this  winter  in  my 
health  and  am  now  entered  on  the  70th  year  of  my  life, 
and  am  by  both  admonished  to  think  of  my  removall 
to  another  and  a  better  state." 

He  still  hankers  after  a  union  of  Churches  and  main- 
tains his  hostilit}'  to  the  Papal  position  : 

"  I  heartily  wish,"  he  says,  "  for  the  Church's  peace 
to  live  in  charity  with  all  Catholic  Christians  ;  and  I 
purpose  by  God's  assistance  in  this  disposition  to  die. 
Would  all  men  be  as  clear  and  candid  in  stating  the 
other  matters  in  difference  between  us  as  you  have  been 
in  the  Sacrifice  and  ordination,  I  believe  we  should  soon 
come  to  an  agreement,  or  at  least  to  a  forbearance  of 
one  another  in  love.  Rut,  alas,  you  have  an  obstacle 
that  till  it  be  removed  will  frustrate  all  our  good  in- 
tentions and  desires.  The  Court  of  Rome  can  never 
bear  to  depart  from  her  dominion,  and  Christedome 
can  never  be  truly  reformed  while  that  exorbitant  power 
stands.  ...  I  say  no  more.  Let  every  one  who  reads 
the  Gospel  of  Christ  and  the  History  of  Christianitie  at  its 
first  plantation  and  in  its  purest  state,  compare  it  with 
the  pomp  and  pride  of  that  Court  ;  and  sa}'-  if  the}^  can 

*  Here's  History  of  the  Church  of  England,  i.  340. 


1737]  THE  QUAKERS 


97 


that  ever  Christ  appointed  such  a  Vicar  or  St.  Peter 
ever  dreamt  of  such  a  Successor." 

As  Visitor  of  All  Souls,  Oxford,  Wake  in  1721  made  a 
Decree  estabhshing  the  absolute  claim  according  to  the 
Founder's  Statutes  of  the  Founder's  Kinsmen— though 
related  in  the  most  remote  degree — to  be  elected  Fellows 
of  the  College.  Similar  decrees  were  in  fact  made  b}' 
Wake's  successors,  Archbishops  Potter,  Herring,  and 
Seeker. 

In  1 72 1  and  1722  the  Episcopal  Bench  was  well  to 
the  fore  in  the  Lords  on  a  Bill  which  the  Commons  had 
passed  on  the  petition  of  the  Quakers,  asking  for  the 
omission  from  the  form  of  Affirmation  allowed  them  by 
law  of  the  words  "  in  the  presence  of  Almighty  God." 
That  petition  set  out  in  forcible  terms  the  Quakers' 
grievance  that  the  words  complained  of  had  to  them 
the  semblance  of  an  oath  which  their  principles  would 
not  allow  them  to  use,  that  by  reason  of  their  scruple 
to  use  the  existing  Affirmation  they  had  fallen  under 
great  sufiferings  by  imprisonment  or  loss  of  properties, 
they  not  being  able  to  answer  in  Courts  of  Equity,  take 
probates  of  wills,  prove  debts  on  commissions  of  bank- 
ruptcy, verify  their  entries  on  the  Leather  or  Candle 
Acts,  take  up  their  freedom,  be  admitted  to  poll  for  their 
freeholds,  give  evidence  for  others,  nor  to  declare  their 
fidelity  to  the  present  Government. 

The  opposition  so  far  as  the  bishops  were  concerned 
in  the  Lords  was  led  by  Atterbury  of  Rochester,  who 
spoke  of  the  Quakers  as  "  a  set  of  people  who  were 
hardly  Christians  "  ;  and  on  17th  January,  when  the 
House  was  going  into  Grand  Committee  on  the  Bill, 
progress  was  delayed  by  a  petition  of  the  London  Clerg}^ 
against  the  Bill. 

The  main  grounds  of  the  petition  were  danger  to  the 
recovery  of  tithe  by  the  clergy,  the  weakening  of  the 
oath's  sanctity,  the  wounding  of  "  the  minds  of  good 
men,"  and  the  triumph  of  the  enemies  of  Christianity 


98  WILLIAM  WAKE  [1716- 


at  such  "  condescensions  "  by  a  Christian  legislature 
to  those  who,  rejecting  baptism,  could  not,  according 
to  the  uniform  judgment  and  practice  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  be  deemed  worthy  of  the  sacred  name  of 
Christian.  This  petition,  as  Townshend  pointed  out 
in  the  debate,  was  presented  by  Dawes  of  York,  the 
stiffest  of  High  Churchmen  and  supporter  of  the 
Divine  Right  of  Kings — not  as  apparently  it  should 
have  been  by  the  Bishop  of  London  or  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury.  A  spirited  debate  arose  on  the  question 
of  receiving  or  rejecting  the  petition.  Wake,  as  well  as 
Potter  his  successor,  then  Bishop  of  Oxford,  voted  for 
its  being  received.  But  the  Whig  bishops  were  numer- 
ous and  opposed  it,  and  in  the  end  the  petition  was 
rejected  by  sixty  to  twentj^-four.  In  Committee 
Wake  moved  that  the  Quakers'  affirmation  might  not 
be  admitted  in  Courts  of  judicature  but  among  them- 
selves— whatever  this  may  have  meant, — and  the  Arch- 
bishop of  York  moved  that  the  Quakers'  affirmation 
should  not  go  in  any  suit  at  law  for  tithes ;  but  both 
propositions  were  rejected  by  large  majorities.  Both 
Wake  and  Potter  voted  against  the  Bill  in  its  final 
stage,  but  it  passed  into  law.  They,  however,  joined 
in  a  protest  against  it. 

In  the  course  of  1 722,  Atterbur}^,  Bishop  of  Rochester, 
was  committed  to  the  Tower  for  being  mixed  up  in 
a  treasonable  correspondence  with  the  Jacobites  in 
France,  and  a  Bill  of  Pains  and  Penalties  against  him 
passed  the  Commons. 

Atterburj^  wrote  to  Wake  complaining  that  he  was 
deprived  of  the  consolations  to  be  derived  from  the 
religious  ministrations  to  which  he  was  accustomed.^ 

"  Tower,  Sunday ,  January  13,  1723. 
"  My  Lord,- — In  a  little  time  after  I  was  here 
confin'd  I  apply'd  for  leave  to  go  to  the  Tower  Chappel, 
but  was  deny'd  it.    I  then  desir'd  yt  ye  Minister  of  ye 
place  might  be  allowd  to  give  me  ye  Sacrament  in 

»  Wake  MSS,  1732. 


1737] 


IN  THE  TOWER 


99 


private.  The  Commanding  Officer  here  comply 'd  with 
my  Request,  .  .  .  but  receiv'd  a  letter  from  ye  Lieu- 
tenant just  as  Mr.  Hawkins  was  coming  in  to  give  me 
ye  Sacrt  forbidding  him  to  let  me  have  it  either  in 
public  or  private,  and  for  this  reason,  Because  I  was  not 
so  near  death  as  to  have  any  immediate  need  of  it.  I 
am  not  sure  of  ye  very  words,  but  of  ye  sense  I  am." 
He  goes  on  to  say  that  he  has  "  since  reed  the  Sacrament 
privately,  but  has  been  refused  leave  to  attend  Church. 
.  .  .  I  do  therefore,"  he  goes  on,  "  apply  myself  to 
your  Grace  desiring  that  you  wd  please  to  interpose 
in  this  matter  ;  and  procure  for  me  3^e  indulgences 
I  ask." 

Wake  preserved  a  much  corrected  draft  of  his 
answer  : 

"  I  have  the  favour  of  your  Lordship's  letter  and 
will  take  the  first  opportunity  to  communicate  the 
contents  of  it  to  one  of  the  Secretaries  of  State  and  be 
yr  advocate  to  the  best  of  my  skill  to  obtain  wt  you 
desire.  .  .  .  Your  Lordship  may  be  assured  I  will  not 
be  wanting  in  my  sincere  endeavours  to  procure  the 
liberty  you  desire  and  wch,  unlesse  by  the  folly  of  other 
people,  can,  I  think,  give  no  offence  to  the  Government. 

"  I  am  very  glad  to  hear  yr  Lordship  is  able  to 
venture  abroad  this  cold  weather  and  heartily  pray  God 
to  establish  yr  Health,  and  with  all  true  respect  remain, — 
My  Lord,  yr  Lordship's  verv  affectionate  Brother  and 
Servt." 

The  same  day  the  Prime  Minister,  Townshend,  writes, 
making  an  appointment  with  the  archbishop,  on  which 
in  W^ake's  hand  is  endosed  the  following  : 

"  Memd, — On  Wednesday  I  waited  on  my  Lord 
Townshend  and  met  Lord  Carteret  there  ;  I  did  wt  I 
could  for  the  Bp.  of  Roch.  but  was  told  this  affair  had 
before  been  settled  by  his  Maty.  He  was  not  allow'd 
to  go  to  the  Chappell ;  but  was  allow'd  to  have  prayers 
in  his  lodgings  as  often  as  he  pleased  ;  and  a  con- 
gregation to  joyn  with  Him  there  on  Sundays  by  the 
Lt.'s  order." 

Wake  does  not  seem  to  have  taken  part  in  the  trial 


lOO 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


of  Atterbury  in  the  House  of  Lords.    He  gets  a  full  report 
of  what  passed  from  one  of  his  suffragans. 
Bishop  of  Coventry  to  Wake  : 

"  May  1 723. 

"  Thursday  and  Friday  were  spent  on  ye  Bp's 
evidence.  The  letters  in  cypher  were  delivered"  to  him 
at  his  request,  but  after  examining  he  alledged  ye  time 
was  too  short,  viz.  2  days,  for  his  decyphers  wt  sense 
they  were  to  be  taken  in.  The  seal  cutter  Rawlinson 
produc'd  by  Council  for  ye  Bill  was  tryed  for  his  skill 
by  others  of  ye  same  trade  for  ye  Bp,  and  upon  several 
tryals  by  impressions  of  ye  same  and  of  different  seals 
made  but  one  mistake.  The  Bp's  Council  sum'd  up  ye 
evidence  this  morning,  and  then  ye  Bp  made  a  very 
moving  speech  2  hours  long  baring  5  minutes.  He 
insisted  much  on  his  real  and  his  legal  innocency  ;  ex- 
posed his  sufferings,  infirmities,  age,  &c.  ;  acquitted 
himself  of  ambition,  covetousness,  and  inclination  to 
meddle  in  business  foreign  to  his  function  ;  profest 
his  zeal  for  ye  Protestant  religion  from  first  setting  out 
into  ye  world,  and  declares  he  was  perhaps  ye  only  Divine 
of  ye  Church  of  Engl,  that  ever  vindicated  Mr.  Luther 
ye  first  reformer  ;  used  ye  words  of  father  Paul  ye 
Venetian  to  go  into  voluntary  banishment  for  ye  quiet 
of  ye  state  ;  and  concluded  with  a  solemn  appeal  to 
God  upon  ye  faith  of  a  Christian  yt  he  never  dictated 
nor  was  privy  to  any  letter  writ  by  Kelly,  yt  he  never 
writ  nor  was  writ  to  by  Ormond  or  Mar,  yt  he  never 
consulted  or  heard  of  any  rising  intended  at  either  of 
ye  3  times  mentioned  in  ye  Bill  ;  his  last  words  were 
that  as  he  came  naked  into  ye  world  he  was  content 
to  be  sent  naked  into  a  strange  country,  yet  had  learnt 
this  lesson  to  say  always,  '  Blessed  be  ye  Name  of  ye 
Lord.'  A  proposal  that  Kelly  shd  be  examined  upon 
oath  touching  3'e  Bp's  dictating  those  3  letters,  was 
carried  by  80  to  40." 

A  serious  point  in  the  bishop's  trial  before  the  Lords 
was  whether  certain  letters  put  in  by  his  accusers  were 
legal  evidence  against  him  and  were  sufficiently  proved  : 
Cowper  thought  not.  The  bishops  were  divided. 
Willis,  then  of  Salisbury,  afterwards  of  Winchester,  was 
on  the  side  of  Ministers  and  made  a  laboured  speech 


1737]  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  IN  ARABIC  loi 


against  his  brother  of  Rochester.  In  the  end  the  Bill 
passed  by  83  to  43.  Atterbury  was  deprived  of  his 
office  and  emoluments  and  rendered  incapable  of  holding 
office.  He  left  England  in  1723,  a  crowd  "  not  more 
than  was  expected,"  so  writes  Walpole  to  Townshend, 
"  attending  him  before  his  embarkation,  and  great 
numbers  of  boats  attending  him  to  the  ship's  side." 
He  died  in  Paris  in  1731,  after  eight  years'  exile  spent 
in  furthering  the  designs  of  the  Pretender. 

Wake  gave  valuable  assistance  to  a  proposal  for 
translating  the  New  Testament  into  Arabic.  The 
proposal  was  supported  by  Humphry  Prideaux,  Dean 
of  Norwich,  and  by  the  Society  for  Promoting  Christian 
Knowledge.  Wake  subscribed  to  the  fund  for  carrying 
out  the  proposal,  and  his  friend,  Lord  Cowper,  gave 
twenty  guineas  to  it.  The  Crown  was  applied  to  for  a 
grant.  Lord  Stanhope  asked  whether  the  archbishop 
approved  of  the  undertaking.  The  reply  was  that  he 
not  only  approved  of  it  but  was  the  principal  promoter 
of  it.  On  the  22nd  June  1726,  Royal  Letters  Patent 
were  issued,  granting  £500  "  without  account  as  '  the 
Royal  '  Encouragement  to  the  work  performed  or  now 
performing  under  the  care  of  the  Society  for  Promoting 
Christian  Knowledge  of  printing  the  New  Testament 
in  Arabick." 

There  was  hardly  a  quarter  of  the  globe  in  respect 
of  which  Wake's  assistance  was  not  given  towards 
education,  and  particularly  towards  the  establishment 
of  missions.  He  preserved  among  his  MSS.  numerous 
papers  relating  to  the  Danish  Missionaries  at  Tranque- 
bar,  in  South  India,  which  supply  the  clearest  evidence 
of  his  being  a  good  friend  to  them  and  their  work. 

Wake  had  probably  kindly  feelings  towards,  though 
he  was  not  much  brought  into  contact  with,  the  Non- 
jurors. We  must  remember  that  the  Nonjurors  had 
from  the  first  much  dissension  among  themselves. 
There  was  from  the  first  a  straitest  sect  of  the  Nonjurors 
represented  by  Hickes,  the  deprived  Dean  of  Worcester, 


I02 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


and  Bishop  Turner  of  Ely,  and  a  militant  section  they 
were  too,  who  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  a  Church  or 
with  Churchmen  who  not  only  took  oaths  of  allegiance  to 
usurpers,  but  acquiesced  in  filling  the  sees  of  bishops  who 
had  been  deprived  for  not  taking  such  oaths.  The 
milder  section,  such  as  Ken,  who  in  1700  and  17 10  advo- 
cated a  return  to  the  Church,  and  Frampton,  who  at- 
tended the  services  of  his  parish  church,  disapproved  of 
these  things,  but  throughout  maintained  the  position 
that  they  were  not  worth  creating  a  formal  schism  over  ; 
and  when  the  last  of  the  deprived  bishops  was  dead,  the 
milder  section  was  reinforced  by  men  like  Robert  Nelson 
and  Henry  Dodwell.  The  differences  between  the  stal- 
warts and  the  milder  section  of  Nonjurors  dealt  not  only 
with  outward  ecclesiastical  forms,  but  extended  to 
questions  of  Doctrine. 

Ken  was  not  in  favour  of  keeping  up  a  succession  of 
nonjuring  bishops  ;  it  looked,  at  any  rate,  too  much  like  a 
schism.  But  in  1694,  Lloyd,  White  of  Peterboro,  and 
Turner  of  Ely,  three  of  the  seven  Nonjurors,  consecrated 
Hickes  and  Wagstaffe  bishops.  Wagstaffe  died  before 
1 71 3,  and  by  then  Lloyd,  White,  and  Turner  were  all  dead; 
so  Hickes,  stalwart  of  the  stalwarts,  got  two  of  the 
bishops  of  the  Scottish  Episcopal  Church,  Campbell  and 
Gadderar,  to  join  with  him  in  consecrating  Collier,  Naw, 
and  Spinkes  to  be  bishops  in  the  nonjuring  Church. 
Hickes  died  a  year  or  two  afterwards .  His  mantle  seems 
to  have  fallen  on  Collier,  a  man  of  learning,  and  he  with 
Spinkes  and  Hawes  consecrated  as  Bishops  Gandy  and 
Brett.  Brett  was  deeply  read  in  liturgical  and  ecclesias- 
tical subjects.  He  had  taken  the  oaths  to  William  and 
Mary,  but  on  the  death  of  Anne  felt  no  allegiance  to  the 
Georges . 

Shortly  after  this  the  dissension  on  doctrinal  matters 
became  acute  among  the  society.  In  171 8,  Collier  and 
Brett  reprinted  the  Communion  Office  of  Edward  the 
Sixth's  first  Prayer  Book,  and  published  a  tract  advo- 
cating its  use.    In  four  points  the  tract  put  it  forward 


1737]      OBJECTIONS  TO  PRAYER  BOOK  103 


as  more  primitive  than  the  English  Prayer  Book — the 
mixing  of  water  with  the  wine,  the  prayer  for  the  Dead, 
the  prayer  for  the  Descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  the 
elements,  and  the  Oblatory  Prayer.  A  Nonjuror,  said  to 
have  been  Spinkes,  who  with  Gandy,  Taylor,  and  Bed- 
ford were  on  the  other  side,  published  a  reply  deprecating 
any  change  as  likelj^  to  cause  division,  and  not  being 
justified  by  the  known  facts.  The  mixing  of  water  with 
the  wine,  said  they,  is  first  mentioned  in  Justin  Martyr, 
one  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  Christ's  Resurrection. 
Intercessory  prayer  being  so  enjoined  in  Scripture,  its 
silence  on  prayer  for  the  Dead  is  against  the  practice. 
The  prayer  for  the  Descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  cannot  be 
traced  higher  than  the  middle  of  the  third  century. 
With  regard  to  the  Oblatory  Prayer,  the  author,  holding 
the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharistic  Sacrifice,  nevertheless 
holds  it  not  to  be  necessary.  It  is  perhaps  not  surprising 
to  hear  that  many  of  those  who  had  been  of  the  extreme 
nonjuring  section,  about  now  became  Romanists. 
Collier's  party,  from  holding  to  the  usages  of  Edward  the 
Sixth's  first  Book,  became  known  as  the  Usagers. 

As  far  back  as  October  1 7 1 7,  Gibson  reports  to  Wake  : 

"  I  am  inform 'd  from  a  good  hand  of  ye  following 
particulars  which  it  seems  proper  that  yr  Grace  shd  be 
acquainted  with  :  '  That  in  two  of  the  Jacobite  Con- 
venticles in  Town  they  have  restor'd  ye  first  common 
prayer  book  of  Edward  vi.  in  ye  4  places  according  to 
Mr.  Collier's  proposal  in  ye  late  Pamphlet  :  That  a  young 
man  of  his,  my  Friend's  acquaintance,  told  him  that  him- 
self and  three  other  young  men  had  for  some  time  join'd 
the  Jacobite  Conventicles,  but  that  the  three  others  were 
actually  gone  over  to  the  Papists  and  had  press 'd  him 
earnestly  to  go  over  with  them  :  That  one  of  the  Priests 
declar'd  lately  that  of  a  very  great  number  of  Penitents 
which  he  had ,  one-fourth  were  such  as  had  come  over  from 
the  Jacobite  Protestants  to  the  Church  of  Rome." 

A  little  later  the  archbishop  gets  from  his  constant 
correspondent,  Sir  Henry  Wotton  : 

I  question  not  but  your  Grace  has  seen  their  new 
8 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Communion  OfBce  which  was  drawn  up  by  Mr.  Collier. 
The  handle  they  have  thereby  given  to  their  enemies  is 
exceeding  great.  To  deny  ye  Sacrament  to  those  who 
will  not  go  into  their  measures  :  to  erect  a  new  Church 
among  themselves  :  To  frame  3  new  offices  of  ye 
Eucharist,  of  Confirmation,  of  Visitation  and  Communion 
of  ye  Sick  .  .  .  is  to  me  an  amazing  thing.  Mr.  Collier 
treats  Mr.  Spinks  very  coarsly  and  the  controversy  is 
very  warm  on  both  sides.  Divide  et  impera,  say  I.  Mr. 
Sp.  has  the  right  side  of  this  question." 

It  is  necessary  to  note  how  far  Wake  was  involved  in 
the  negotiations  which  at  first  the  Nonjurors  generally, 
and  later  the  Collier  section  of  them,  opened,  having  for 
their  object  union  with  the  Eastern  Church.  For  our 
purpose  it  is  sufficient  to  summarise  shortly  the  course 
of  these  negotiations.  Arsenius,  Archbishop  of  Theba, 
being  in  London  in  1716,  Brett  drew  up  a  proposal  for 
union,  or  at  least  a  concordat  betwixt  the  Orthodox,  and 
Catholic  remnant  of  the  British  Churches,  and  the 
Catholic  and  Apostolic  Oriental  Church.  Of  the  four 
Eastern  patriarchs  who  represented  the  latter  Church  in 
the  matter  Jerusalem  was  to  be  acknowledged  head, 
Constantinople  and  Rome  being  placed  on  an  equal 
footing.  The  Czar,  to  whom  the  document  or  its  pur- 
port had  been  carried  by  Arsenius,  was  favourable  to  the 
proposal  and  recommended  it  to  the  Patriarchs.  Brett's 
proposal  after  providing  for  the  acknowledgment  of  the 
Catholic  remnant  of  the  British  Churches  as  part  of  the 
Catholic  Church  in  communion  with  the  Apostles,  with 
the  holy  fathers  of  the  Councils  of  Nice  and  Con- 
stantinople, and  with  their  successors,  went  on  :  The  said 
Catholic  remnant  shall  "  oblige  themselves  to  revive  " 
what  they  long  professed  to  wish  for — the  ancient  godly 
discipline  of  the  Church — and  which  they  have  already 
actually  begun  to  restore.  That,  in  order  to  a  still 
nearer  union,  be  as  near  a  conformity  in  worship  estab- 
lished as  is  consistent  with  the  different  circumstances 
and  customs  of  nations. 

In  their  answer,  dated  21st  August  1721,  the  Eastern 


1737]       PROPOSED  VISIT  TO  RUSSIA 


105 


patriarchs  did  not  much  hke  any  preference  being  given 
to  the  Patriarchate  of  Jerusalem,  they  prefer  the  liturgy 
of  St.  James  to  the  English  Liturgy,  adhere  to  Tran- 
substantiation  and  Images.  The  Nonjurors  replied 
they  would  have  the  first  six  general  Councils  next  to 
but  not  equal  to  the  Holy  Scripture.  The  seventh 
Council  of  Nice,  with  invocation  of  angels  and  departed 
saints  and  transubstantiation,  they  would  not  accept. 
They  still  hope  for  a  union  liberty  being  accorded  on 
points  of  disagreement,  the  first  four  centuries,  and  not 
the  eighth,  being  taken  as  authoritative. 

In  1722  the  Czar  wanted  two  of  the  Nonjurors  to 
come  and  confer  at  Moscow.  But  the  Nonjurors  were 
poor,  and  the  journey  expensive.  The  friendly  Czar 
died  :  and  so  the  matter  dropped.  Moreover,  the 
Jerusalem  Patriarch  somewhat  indiscreetly  sent  copies 
of  Brett's  proposal  to  Archbishop  Wake.  He  did  not 
wish  to  expose  the  papers  or  to  subject  the  Nonjurors 
to  ridicule  and  misrepresentation.  So  he  adopted  a 
policy  of  masterly  inactivity  and  did  nothing. 

Wake  showed  the  same  care  in  his  visitations  as 
archbishop  as  he  had  shown  in  his  episcopal  visita- 
tions. He  framed  in  his  own  hand  careful  and  detailed 
dates  of  the  matters  to  be  dealt  with,  which  begin  with 
these  words  :  "  It  having  pleased  God  to  give  me  this 
I  2nd  (probably  the  last  I  shall  ever  have)  opportunity 
of  visiting  my  diocese,  I  think  it  my  duty  to  endeavour 
to  make  the  best  use  of  it  I  can." 

Wake  seems  to  have  taken  no  very  prominent  part 
in  the  unhappy  impeachment  and  conviction  of  Lord 
Chancellor  Parker,  Earl  of  Macclesfield,  in  1725.  So 
far  as  he  intervened  it  seems  to  have  been  as  one  whose 
desire  to  do  justice  was  certainly  tempered  by  kindli- 
ness and  mercy.  A  letter  from  the  Chancellor's  wife 
to  the  archbishop  looks  like  this.    In  it  she  says  : 

"  31s/  May  1725. 
"  Lord  Macclesfield  has  been  inform 'd  by  very 
good  hands  that  something  has  been  design 'd  against 


io6 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


him  this  day  in  both  Houses  of  Parhament  ;  what  the 
particular  design  is  he  does  not  know ;  perhaps  it  may 
be  a  design  immediately  to  vest  his  estate  in  Trustees 
till  the  Fine  is  paid.  If  this  should  be  the  Design  I 
need  not  represent  to  your  Grace  the  hardship  of  such 
a  proceeding,  first  to  lay  a  man  in  prison  till  the  Fine 
is  paid,  and  then,  without  giving  him  the  least  time  to 
raise  the  money,  to  seize  his  estate  which  will  not  be 
sufficient  to  discharge  the  Fine  and  yet  will  put  him 
entirely  out  of  a  capacity  to  raise  the  money  so  that  he 
must  be  a  Prisoner  for  life  not  to  mention  the  detriment 
it  might  be  to  me  and  my  Family  ;  if  an  estate  and  a 
seat  which  was  settled  upon  me  upon  my  marriage  shd 
be  committed  to  the  care  of  Trustees.  .  .  .  As,  therefore, 
your  Grace  has,  my  Lord,  the  great  honour  to  plead  in 
his  Favour,  we  hope  you  will  be  pleas 'd  to  come  to  the 
House  of  Lords  to-day,  and  oppose  anything  being  laid 
on  him  more  severe  than  what  he  already  suffers." ^ 

It  is  foreign  to  our  purpose  to  discuss  how  far 
Macclesfield  deserved  what  he  got  —  Lord  Mahon 
thinks  he  was  a  scapegoat  for  an  iniquitous  system  ; 
Lord  Campbell  thinks  his  punishment  just  ^ ;  bribes  or 
semi-bribes  were  not  so  studiously  shunned  then  as  by 
English  people  now.  Down  to  Lord  Cowper's  time  the 
Lord  Chancellor  used  to  get  New  Year's  gifts  amount- 
ing to  ;^^20oo  or  £3000  from  the  Bar  practising  before 
him  and  the  officers  of  his  court.  There  was  un- 
doubtedly great  slackness  in  the  practice  of  the  Masters 
in  Chancery.  Good  judge  as  he  had  been,  poor  Maccles- 
field never  came  back. 

George  i.  was  very  fond  of  what  were  called  mas- 
querades. These  were  in  fact  masked  balls.  They 
were  frequented  by  rather  loose  sections  of  society, 
and  were  thought  by  the  stricter  folk  to  encourage 
immorality.  The  bishops  were  stirred  to  take  some  step 
against  this  royal  proclivity.  Waddington,  who  had 
just  been  promoted  to  the  Bishopric  of  Chichester,  on 

1  Wake  MSS,  1725. 

^  History,  ii.  106. 

'  Lives  of  the  Chancellors,  iv.  536. 


1737]  MASQUERADES 


107 


5th  December  1724,  writes  to  Wake  about  a  gathering 
of  prelates,  where,  says  he,  "  every  one  of  them  exprest 
a  very  hearty  joy  and  satisfaction  in  yr  Grace's  readiness 
to  appear  at  the  head  of  ye  suffragan  Bps  in  so  good  a 
cause.  London  went  so  far,  but  wd  not  draw  up  repn 
of  case  as  a  foundatn  to  debate  upon  when  there  shd 
be  a  genl  meetg,  but  wd  attend  genl  meeting  to  con- 
sider what  was  to  be  done." 
Wake's  own  note  is: 

"  This  meeting  was  held  accordingly  :  almost  all 
the  Bps  appeared  and  agreed  to  desire  myselfe  with 
the  Bps  of  London  and  Winchester  to  desire  my  Lord 
Townshend  in  our  names  to  request  his  Majtie  to 
forbid  the  Masquerades  intended  to  be  held  the  beginning 
of  ye  year.  Lord  Townshend  desired  our  memorial  in 
writing.    We  drew  it  up  in  the  following  form." 

The  address  states  that  the  masquerades  having 
given  offence  to  serious  and  pious  people,  some  of  the 
bishops  thought  that  the  archbishop  should  convene  a 
meeting  of  his  suffragans  to  consider  what  should  be 
done.  Accordingly  sixteen  bishops,  "all  promoted 
by  His  Majtie  and  every  one  zealously  affected  to  his 
person  and  Government,"  met,  but  with  the  strictest 
secrecy,  at  the  House  of  Lords.  It  goes  on  to  excuse  his 
Majesty  for  not  realising  "  what  offence  "  these  assem- 
blies "  gave  to  good  people  in  this  countrie  where  they 
had  not  been  allow 'd  of  in  any  former  reigne  nor  were  at 
all  suitable  to  the  Temper  or  Genius  of  this  nation." 

"  We  are  far  from  supposing  that  all  who  go  to 
these  assemblies  have  any  wicked  designs  in  it.  We  are 
rather  persuaded  that  many  who  allow  themselves 
this  Libertie  do  it  out  of  curiosity  to  see  what  is  done 
there  ;  or  as  thinking  it  to  be  an  innocent  diversion  or 
amusement,  but  fear  at  the  same  time  that  many  who 
have  gone  innocently  thither  have  very  much  lost 
ground  in  vertue  there,  and  by  seeing  and  hearing  what 
they  cannot  but  see  and  hear  in  such  places  and  in 
such  company  may  have  had  their  passions  raised, 
those  desires  stirr'd  up  in  them  as  without  the  par- 


io8 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


ticular  grace  of  God  and  a  present  consideration  and 
care  of  themselves  may  be  carried  on  to  the  utter  ruine 
of  their  Innocence.  ... 

"  'Tis  neither  humour  nor  precisenesse  nor  a  desire 
to  find  fault  with  what  is  done  or  allow'd  by  the  Court  nor 
any  other  the  like  motive  that  influences  us  in  this 
affair.  .  .  . 

"  By  suppressing  these  assemblies  His  Majtie  will 
do  wht  is  not  only  pleasing  to  God  but  most  agreeable 
to  the  best  and  most  serious  part  of  his  people." 

Wake  wrote  the  address  himself — there  are  a  very 
few  corrections  in,  I  think,  Gibson's  hand. 

Its  effect  is  best  told  in  Wake's  own  endorsement 
on  his  draft  of  it  : 

"  This  Letter  or  Memorial  being  delivered  by  us  to 
my  Lord  Townshend,  he  promis'd  to  do  his  best  with 
the  King  to  satisfie  our  desires.  But  what  was  done 
by  His  Lordship  I  cannot  tell  :  it  appeared  that  no 
regard  was  had  to  our  advice  and  request." 

Lord  Mahon  says  that  it  was  not  until  the  earth- 
quake at  Lisbon  in  1755  threw  London  into  a  panic,  that 
the  masquerades  were  given  up. 

Wake  was  constant  in  his  efforts  to  keep  up  a  strict 
standard  in  high  ecclesiastical  circles.  We  find  the 
Prime  Minister  writing  to  him  on  the  6th  May  1724  : 

"  I  have  acquainted  the  King  with  the  conversation 
I  had  with  your  Grace  the  other  day.  ...  I  have  the 
satisfaction  of  sending  your  Grace  by  his  Majty's 
command  a  copy  of  an  order  concerning  the  Disposal  of 
the  Livings  in  the  gift  of  the  Crown.  The  King  is 
extremely  pleased  to  find  your  Grace's  thoughts  concur 
so  entirely  with  his  own." 

The  order  is  to  be  entered  in  the  offices  of  the  principal 
Secretaries  of  State  and  copies  sent  to  the  bishops.  On 
the  fly-leaf  is  Wake's  draft  of  his  answer.  It  will  be 
seen  he  brings  up  the  residence  of  Cathedral  Dignitaries  : 

"  Everybody  that  wishes  well  to  the  Ch.  of  England 
must  be  very  much  pleased  with  His  Majtie 's  order.  .  .  . 


1737] 


BISHOP  WILSON 


109 


I  take  the  Liberty  to  enclose  the  paper  wch  my  Lord 
of  London  and  I  mentioned  to  your  Lordship  relating 
to  the  residence  of  Dignitaries  in  their  Cathedral  and 
Collegiate  Chs.  We  are  persuaded  with  such  an  order 
and  Declaration  from  His  Majtie  as  is  there  proposed 
would  give  great  satisfaction  to  the  Clergy  in  generall 
and  in  particular  to  the  members  of  those  Bodies  who 
keep  their  residence  as  they  ought  to  do." 

One  of  the  painful  complications  with  which  Wake 
as  archbishop  was  brought  into  contact  was  the  dispute 
between  Thomas  Wilson,  the  saintly  Bishop  of  Sodor 
and  Man,  and  Lord  Derby,  the  lord  of  the  Isle  of  Man. 
The  bishop  for  an  absurdly  small  stipend  did  much 
good  work  in  the  island,  assisting  its  material  develop- 
ment by  cutting  down  forests  and  planting  trees, 
as  well  as  ministering  to  the  religious  necessities  of 
the  islanders.  He  claimed  indeed  and  exercised  the 
right  to  administer  spiritual  penalties  in  a  mediaeval 
or  pre-mediaeval  way.  For  excommunicating  and  im- 
prisoning an  alleged  adulteress  he  was  fined  ;^io  by  the 
civil  authority,  and  though  this  fine  was  remitted  he 
was  afterwards  fined  again  and  kept  in  prison  in  default 
of  payment.  He  appealed  in  1722  to  the  Privy  Council. 
As  bishop  he  was  subject  to  the  Archbishop  of  York 
as  his  metropolitan,  and  many  and  urgent  were  the 
appeals  the  northern  archbishop  Dawes  made  to  his 
brother  at  Canterbury  for  help  to  Bishop  Wilson. 

The  dispute  ran  on  for  a  long  time  :  it  was  partly 
patched  up  in  1719,  and  Wilson  wrote  to  Wake  in 
November  of  that  year:  "  On  my  return  I  shall  dis- 
charge my  duty  without  failing  in  the  respect  which 
I  know  to  be  due  to  the  civil  magistrate." 

The  archbishop  writes  in  July  1722  as  to  the  bishop's 
appeal  to  the  Privy  Council  : 

I  have  this  day  sent  up  to  my  Lord  President  a 
Petn  to  the  King  in  Council  from  the  Bishop  of  Man 
and  his  Vicars-General  for  relief  from  an  unjust  im- 
prisonment which  they  now  lie  under  from  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  Island.  ...  I  earnestly  intreat  your  Grace 


I  lO 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


to  forward  and  support  the  good  Bishop's  Petition  with 
all  }T  might  ;  who  I  really  think,  as  well  as  his  Church, 
is  in  a  proper  state  of  persecution." 

And  a  fortnight  later  he  writes  again  : 

"  I  most  humbly  thank  your  Grace  for  attending  the 
Council  in  the  good  Bishop  of  Man's  case  :  and  am 
abundantly  satisfied  that  through  your  and  my  Lord 
President's  kind  endeavours  everything  is  done  which 
as  yet  can  be  legally  done  for  his  relief." 

A  year  later  on  the  i8th  May  1723  there  is  another 
urgent  letter  from  '  W.  Ebor  '  to  Wake  : 

"  Understanding  by  the  Bishop  of  Man  that  his 
Cause  is  appointed  to  be  heard  before  the  Council  on 
the  22nd — I  cannot  forbear  giving  your  Grace  the 
trouble  of  this  earnestly  to  desire  you  to  attend  and  to 
use  your  utmost  endeavours  to  procure  that  good 
Bishop  Justice  and  Peace  and  the  Free  exercise  of  his 
Ecclesiastical  authority  over  his  Diocese." 

He  goes  on  to  urge  that  several  orders  lately  given 
by  the  "  Governe  and  subgoverne  must  be  taken  off 
ye  Records  "  or  "  branded  with  such  a  mark  of  Illegality 
as  may  sufficiently  testifie  His  Majestic 's  and  his 
Council's  disapprobation  of  and  Displeasure  against  " 
them.  Provision  too, he  says,  must  be  made  to  have  ap- 
peals to  His  Majesty  and  "  not  send  parties  aggriev'd  " 
to  the  Government  for  redress  against  his  own  officers. 

It  is  not  till  1724  that  there  comes  a  note  from  the 
Bishop  of  Sodor  and  Man  of  the  actual  trial  : 

"  I  had  not  an  opportunity  after  the  Council  was 
ended  of  giving  your  Grace  my  most  humble  thanks 
for  Presence  there  yesterday  ;  and  take  the  Liberty 
of  doing  it  this  way,  and  of  most  earnestly  praying 
your  Grace  will  be  pleas 'd  if  it  be  consistent  with  your 
Grace's  health  and  affairs  to  be  at  the  Council  to- 
morrow when  my  adversarys  will  be  sure  to  bring  their 
utmost  power  to  hinder  the  execution  of  wt  the  Com- 
mittee may  think  due  to  my  sufferings." 


1737]     WAKE  AND  FOREIGN  MISSIONS  iii 

Wake's  interest  in  Foreign  Missions  is  attested  by 
his  careful  preservation  among  his  MSS  of  papers  of 
every  kind  relating  to  the  establishment  of  the  Church 
and  the  advancement  of  religion  in  different  parts 
of  the  world.  His  own  views  would  incline  him  to 
interest  in  Foreign  Missions,  and  his  duty  as  well  as 
his  inclination  made  him  speciall}^  attentive  to  the 
needs  of  America  and  her  Colonies.  From  his  friend 
and  predecessor,  Tenison,  came  a  legacy  to  care  for 
the  Church's  children  in  "  the  Plantations  "  if  not 
for  the  heathen.  One  of  Tenison's  last  acts  as 
Primate  had  been  to  put  forth  a  letter,  dated  the 
1 8th  May  1714,  to  the  Clergy  of  his  Peculiars  in 
and  about  London,  accompanied  by  a  royal  letter 
craving  aid  for  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of 
the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts.  On  the  17th  April  171 8, 
George  i.  issued  a  royal  letter  which  recited  the 
society's  need  of  funds,  especially  the  engagement  the 
society  had  entered  into  of  maintaining  a  missionary 
schoolmaster  and  interpreter  among  the  Indians 
bordering  upon  New  York  (which  engagement  alone 
and  the  incidental  charges  would  amount  to  near  half 
of  the  society's  annual  subscriptions),  and  provided 
that  publication  be  made  thereof  on  the  third  Sunday 
in  Advent  to  be  followed  by  a  collection  in  the  subse- 
quent week.  The  royal  letter  was  accompanied  by  a 
letter  from  the  archbishop,  of  which  his  own  draft  is 
extant  at  Christ  Church,  dated  the  20th  November 
1 71 8,  from  Lambeth. 

In  1 72 1  South  Carolina  sent  two  representatives  to 
England  with  letters  to  the  archbishop,  in  which  they 
state  that  though  they  have  "  many  more  difhcultys  to 
struggle  with  "  than  any  of  the  neighbouring  Colonys, 
yet  .  .  .  they  are  "  building  a  church  superior  to  any 
yet  built  in  America."  They  solicit  from  His  Majesty 
"a  Sett  of  Plate  and  an  altarpiece  for  the  same,"  and 
beg  Wake  to  help  them  to  "  obtain  that  Donation." 

On  17th  January  1723-4,  Wake  gets  an  appeal  from 


I  12 


WILLIAM  WAKE 


[1716- 


Johnson,the  only  clergyman  of  the  Established  Church 
in  the  whole  Colony  of  Connecticut.    It  says  ; 

"  There  are  a  considerable  number,  5  or  6  I  am  sure, 
very  promising  young  gentlemen  who  —  being  very 
fitted  'for  want  of  episcopal  ordination'  —  decline 
the  Ministr}'-  .  .  .  being,  partly  from  themselves  and 
partly  through  the  Influence  of  their  Friends,  loth 
to  expose  themselves  to  the  Danger  of  the  Seas  and 
Distempers  from  Mr.  Browne's  case  has  been  very  terri- 
fying. So  that  the  fountain  of  our  misery  is  the  want 
of  a  Bishop  for  whom  there  are  many  thousands  of 
souls  in  this  country  do  long  and  pray, 

"  Stratford  in  New  England, 
Jan.  17,  1723-4." 

But  America  had  no  monopoly  of  the  archiepiscopal 
solicitude.  At  Tranquebar  in  India  were  established  a 
band  of  Royal  Danish  Evangelical  ^^lissionaries.  In 
the  winter  of  171 8  comes  a  long  Latin  letter  from 
them  to  Wake,  detailing  their  difficulties — from  illness, 
lack  of  means,  want  of  buildings,  etc.  Even  for  them, 
Wake  gets  a  royal  letter  of  sympathy,  and  to  arouse 
the  sympathy  of  Churchmen  at  home  ;  and  is,  of  course, 
not  wanting  in  help  as  well  as  sympathy  from  himself. 

Wake's  aid  to  religious  communities  all  over  the 
world  went  far  beyond  what  he  could  officially  be 
expected  to  do.  He  corresponded  with  the  celebrated 
Jablowsky  ;  with  the  King  of  Prussia  and  his  advisors, 
the  project  of  a  union  among  the  Reformed  Churches 
had  careful  consideration.  A  striking  monument  to  his 
indefatigable  industry,  as  well  as  to  his  excellent 
linguistic  attainments,  is  the  folio  volume  among  the 
Wake  MSS  containing  his  letters  from  foreign  corre- 
spondents— about  half  in  French  and  half  in  Latin, 
each  letter  followed  by  the  draft  of  the  answer  sent  to 
it  in  Wake's  own  handwTiting.  No  draft  could  show 
signs  of  having  been  the  subject  of  more  careful  revision 
than  these  draft  replies,  always  in  the  language  of  the 
letter  which  they  answered. 


1737] 


DEATH  OF  WAKE 


"3 


For  the  last  five  or  six  years  of  his  life,  Wake  was 
prevented  by  the  infirmities  of  age  and  bad  health 
from  attending  to  business.  The  Wake  MSS  at  Christ- 
church — so  stupendous  a  monument  to  his  industry 
and  ability — stop  in  1728  or  1729  :  one  of  the  latest 
in  date  is  : 

"  The  Forme  and  maner  of  makyng  and  conse- 
cratyng  of  ArcheBishoppes,  Bishoppes,  Priestes,  and 
Deacons,  a.d.  1549,"  in  the  handwriting  of  Archbishop 
Wake. 

At  the  end  : 

"  This  book  was  transcribed  by  me  with  my  own 
hand  from  the  printed  copy  of  it  in  Lambeth  Library 
in  4to  ;  being  the  only  copy  I  ever  saw  of  it.  The 
pages  exactly  answer  one  another,  and  I  have  generally 
followed  the  very  spelling  of  the  print.  So  that  it  is 
in  all  respects  an  exact  copy  of  it. 

"  W.  Cant." 
"  May  \oth,  1727,  Lambeth  House." 

His  most  carefull}^  recorded  entries  stop  about  this 
time  or  but  little  later. 

The  archbishop's  copy  of  the  Ordination  Service 
has  at  the  beginning  a  list  of  all  persons  ordained  by 
him  from  23rd  December  1705  to  25th  September  1726, 
and  a  list  of  all  bishops  consecrated  from  i6th  January 
171 5  (?  1716),  when  he  became  archbishop,  to  a.d.  1728. 
At  the  end  of  the  book  is  a  list  of  persons  preferred 
by  the  archbishop  from  1705  to  1728 — all  in  the  arch- 
bishop's handwriting. 

Wake  died  at  Lambeth  on  the  24th  January  1737. 
He  was  buried  "  in  a  private  manner  "  at  Croydon. 

His  wife  died  before  him  in  1730. 

Wake  is  said  to  have  spent  nearly  £  \  i  ,000  in  repairs 
to  the  palaces  at  Lambeth  and  Croydon.  A  dozen 
years  or  more  before  his  death,  the  Bishop  of  Worcester 
writes  to  him  : 

"  I  perceive  you  have  been  at  vast  expense  in  yr  2 
Houses  ;   'tis  extremely  visible  at  Lambeth,  and  Dr. 


114 


WILLIAM  WAKE  [1716-1737 


Byrche  tells  me  (if  possible)  more  so  at  Croydon,  and 
your  Grace  builds  strong  and  they  will  stand  to  do 
Honour  to  your  memory  in  after  ages." 

A  new  vicarage  house  at  Croydon  is  said  to  have 
cost  him  £700.  He  is  said  to  have  been  liberal  in  his 
hospitalities  at  Lambeth  and  Croydon  ;  "  constant 
charities  were  reached  out  to  the  unfortunate  and 
distressed,  a  great  number  of  the  poor  inhabitants  were 
clothed  and  fed,  and  liberal  alms  conveyed  to  the 
necessitous  and  modest  poor." 

Wake  left  no  son.  His  six  daughters  were  all 
married,  the  five  eldest  to  laymen  in  the  position  of 
country  squires,  and  the  youngest  to  Dr.  John  Lynch, 
Dean  of  Canterbury. 

By  his  will  he  left  his  books  and  MSS  with  a  curious 
collection  of  coins,  the  whole  valued  at  ;£io,ooo,  to  his 
old  college,  Christ  Church,  Oxford.  His  sermons  and 
charges  were  published  in  three  volumes. 


JOHN  POTTER 


1 737-1 747 

John  Potter  was  born  at  Wakefield,  in  Yorkshire, 
about  the  year  1674.  He  would  thus  be  a  boy  of  fourteen 
at  the  time  of  the  flight  of  James  11.  and  the  Revolution. 
He  was  the  son  of  Mr.  Thomas  Potter,  a  linen  draper 
of  Wakefield.  He  is  therefore  another  instance — 
occurring  in  an  epoch  unpropitious  for  the  develop- 
ment of  humble  talent — of  the  fact  that  in  all  ages  in 
England  men  have  been  able  to  rise  from  low  social 
level  to  wealth  and  the  highest  offices  in  the  State. 
He  was  educated  at  Wakefield  School — an  institution 
whose  alumni  include  also  the  great  scholars  Bentley, 
Bingham,  and  Dr.  Radcliffe,  founder  of  the  Radcliffe 
Library  at  Oxford.  Potter  early  showed  himself  both 
industrious  and  clever.  His  progress  in  his  studies, 
especially  in  Greek,  was  remarkable.  Indeed  there  is 
more  than  legend  that  he  was  abnormally  precocious.  In 
1842  a  Northamptonshire  yeoman  churchwarden  of  his 
parish  went  to  his  rector  and  said  that  there  had  descended 
to  an  ancestor  of  his  a  picture,  which  family  tradition 
said  was  the  likeness  of  a  very  clever  little  boy,  the  son 
of  a  linen  draper  at  Wakefield,  in  Yorkshire,  who  could 
read  the  Greek  Testament  at  6,  and  had  read  it  up  to 
the  place  marked  in  the  book  he  holds  in  his  hand, 
and  who  afterwards  became  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
In  the  picture  the  boy  had  his  hand  on  a  book,  and  a 
scroll  records,  cetatis  suce  vi,  anno  i6jg.  The  picture 
was  presented  to  Archbishop  Howley  and  brought  by 
him  to  Lambeth.  The  boy's  face  is  described  as  being 
full  of  intelligence.    Unwonted  precocity  was  always 

»I5 


Ii6 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


ascribed  to  Potter,  and  as  the  other  points  in  the  tradi- 
tion agree  with  Potter,  it  was  preserved  at  Lambeth 
as  representing  the  archbishop  when  a  boy.  The 
universities  as  late  as  the  seventeenth  century  received 
their  students  young  ;  and,  when  he  was  only  fourteen, 
the  young  Yorkshireman  found  his  way  to  Oxford. 
University  College  had  then  the  good  fortune  — 
which  it  has  so  often  since  enj03^ed — of  having  for  its 
master  Dr.  Arthur  Chaslett,  an  able  scholar,  and  one 
who  patronised  learning  and  scholarship,  especially  when 
displayed  in  the  youthful  members  of  his  College.  We 
have  already  come  across  him  as  a  friend  of  Wake,  who 
urged  on  him  the  acceptance  of  the  see  of  Lincoln. 

In  1688,  Potter  entered  as  a  Batteler  at  University 
College,  and  in  1693  he  took  his  B.A.  degree.  By  this 
time  the  master  had  formed  a  high  opinion  of  his 
scholarship  and  of  his  general  promise,  and  in  the  follow- 
ing year  the  youthful  editor,  he  being  only  nineteen, 
published  at  the  University  Press,  by  the  advice  and 
at  the  expense  of  the  master  of  his  college,  an  edition 
with  various  readings  and  notes  of  Plutarch's  treatise 
on  the  study  of  poetry,  De  audiendis  Poetis,  and  of  the 
oration  of  Basil  the  Great  on  Greek  studies,  De  Legendis 
Grcecorum  Libris.  So  highh^  thought  the  Master  of 
University  of  young  Potter's  production  that  he  pre- 
sented copies  of  it  as  New- Year  gifts  to  the  young 
students  of  his  house.  In  the  year  following,  1695,  he 
was  chosen  Fellow  of  Lincoln,  and  took  his  M. A.  degree 
on  1 6th  October  in  the  same  year.  He  employed  him- 
self in  taking  pupils,  and  shortly  after  took  holy  orders. 
Greek  had  always  been  the  future  archbishop's  strong 
point  and  his  favourite  study,  and,  aiming  at  the  highest, 
he  had,  even  before  publishing  his  edition  of  Plutarch 
and  Basil,  begun  an  edition  of  Lycophron,  the  most 
obscure  of  all  the  Greek  authors,  as  he  is  quaintly 
called,  "  the  tenebrous  poet  "  ;  but  difficulties  occurred, 
and  the  completion  of  this  difficult  work  had  to  be  put 
off.    In  1697  a  very  beautiful  folio  edition  of  Lycophron 


1747] 


CLASSICAL  LABOURS 


117 


was  put  forth  by  Potter  at  the  University  Press.  At 
this  time  one  of  the  first,  if  not  the  first,  of  European 
classical  scholars  was  Grcevius,  the  Professor  of  Elo- 
quence and  History  in  the  University  of  Utrecht.  He 
had  published  several  editions  of  Greek  and  Roman 
authors  with  notes  and  prefaces,  and  the  young  Fellow 
of  Lincoln,  who  had  had  the  privilege  of  corresponding 
with  the  great  scholar,  five  years  later,  in  1702,  repub- 
lished Lycophron  with  a  Dedication  to  Groevius.  We 
are  told  that  he  had  intended  Nicander's  Theriaca  and 
Alexipharmaca,  with  the  Greek  Scholia  on  both  poems 
and  his  own  annotations,  to  accompany  Lycophron  ; 
but  Potter  was  already  a  busy  man,  and  his  numerous 
avocations  prevented  his  accomplishing  this  plan. 
Lycophron 's  poem  presented  great  opportunities  for 
a  laborious  and  learned  scholar.  It  consists  of  a  long 
course  of  predictions  supposed  to  be  uttered  by  Cassan- 
dra, daughter  of  Priam,  King  of  Troy,  standing  on  a 
mountain  near  the  city,  just  as  the  ships  of  Paris  are 
about  to  set  sail  for  Sparta.  We  are  told  that  Potter 
"  illustrated  the  prophetic  forebodings,  mythological 
obscurities,  and  historical  allusions  "  ;  there  had  been 
an  edition  of  Tzetzes,  the  Greek  Scholiast,  in  1542,  and 
a  translation  of  Scaliger  in  1 584,  and  from  these  Potter 
gave  copious  extracts.  Lycophron,  from  his  obscurity, 
seems  to  have  had  attractions  for  young  scholars. 
Canter  published  a  commentary  in  1566  at  the  age  of 
twenty-four;  Meursuis  at  Leyden  in  1597  when  only 
eighteen  ;  Potter,  who  was  twenty-two  when  his  work 
came  out,  quoted  freely  from  these  predecessors  of  his, 
besides  adding  his  own  annotations. 

Before  1702,  however.  Potter  had  given  to  the  world 
the  results  of  his  labours  in  a  wider  classical  field.  In 
1697  he  published  the  first  volume  of  his  Archceologia 
Grceca,  or  The  Antiquities  of  Greece,  and  in  the  year 
following  the  second  volume.  This  is  a  very  learned 
and  elaborate  work  on  the  customs,  laws,  and  religion 
of  ancient  Greece.    A  Latin  translation  was  almost  at 


ii8  JOHN  POTTER  [i737- 

once  undertaken  at  Leyden,  and  in  1702  was  published 
under  Potter's  own  inspection  with  elaborate  illustra- 
tions and  every  typographical  advantage  known  to 
the  day.  The  work  was  dedicated  to  Harley,  then 
Speaker  to  the  House  of  Commons — afterwards  with 
Bolingbroke,  leader  of  the  Tory  party — promoter  of  the 
Acts  to  punish  occasional  conformity,  and  founder  of 
the  tiarleian  Library,  and  finally  Earl  of  Oxford.  The 
language  of  the  address  is,  after  the  style  of  dedicators 
to  our  notions,  fulsome — attributing  to  Harley  the 
highest  place,  not  only  among  Greek  and  Latin,  but 
among  Hebrew,  scholars,  and  says  no  one  could  equal 
him  in  theology,  criticism,  or  classical  knowledge  ! 
The  work  remained  a  standard  work  for  many 
generations  and  went  through  several  editions.  It 
undoubtedly  established  Potter's  position  as  in  the 
front  rank  of  classical  scholars,  and  involved  him  in 
correspondence  with  learned  scholars  abroad. 

We  are  now  to  find  Potter  moving  forward  in  his 
own  calling  of  a  divine.  He  took  his  B.D.  in  July  1704. 
He  had  attracted  the  notice  of  Archbishop  Tenison. 
In  1704,  Tenison  appointed  Potter  one  of  his  chaplains, 
and  he  thereupon  moved  from  Oxford  to  reside  with 
the  archbishop  at  Lambeth.  Later  on  the  families  of 
the  archbishop  and  his  chaplain  became  associated 
by  marriage, — Potter's  eldest  daughter  marrying 
Tenison 's  great-nephew  ;  but  the  lady  died  in  giving 
birth  to  her  first  child  in  1730. 

Potter  became  D.D.  in  April  1706,  and  soon 
after  was  appointed  Chaplain-in-Ordinary  to  Queen 
Anne. 

There  is  no  record  of  Potter  taking  any  part  in  the 
momentous  discussions  over  the  Union  of  England  and 
Scotland,  which  was  accomplished  the  year  after  his 
appointment  as  Royal  Chaplain.  Living  in  the  Prim- 
ate's palace  at  Lambeth,  he  could  not  fail  to  follow 
them  with  interest,  his  chief  having  been  one  of  the 
English  Commissioners  appointed  to  discuss  with  the 


1747] 


CHURCH  GOVERNMENT 


119 


Scottish  Commissioners  ^  the  terms  of  the  Treaty,  and 
bringing  into  the  Lords  a  provision  for  the  security 
of  the  Church  of  England  to  be  inserted  as  a  funda- 
mental part  of  that  Treaty. 

Potter  now  turned  his  studies  in  an  ecclesiastical 
and  theological  direction.  He  had  from  boyhood  been 
a  student,  and  a  very  diligent  student.  We  cannot 
doubt  that  in  the  years  since  his  ordination,  if  not 
before,  he  had  studied  deeply  the  Fathers  and  early 
divines.  In  1707  he  published  in  8vo  his  Discourse  on 
Church  Government.  The  work  is  a  learned  one,  which 
remained  for  a  century  or  more  a  standard  work  among 
English  theologians.  Potter  in  it  takes  up  and  defends 
the  Church  position  and  the  institution  of  the  three 
orders  of  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  as  of  Divine 
origin.  He  explains  away  St.  Jerome's  theory  of  the 
original  equality  of  the  three  orders  as  presbyters,  and 
the  subsequent  promotion,  in  the  interests  of  Church 
order  and  discipline,  of  one  presbyter  to  authority  over 
the  others  with  the  name  of  bishop.  Jerome  had 
based  his  theory  on  the  indiscriminate  use  of  bishop 
and  presbyter  in  the  New  Testament.  Potter  remarks 
that  this  had  been  noticed  by  Chrysostom,  Theodore, 
and  other  ancient  Fathers,  without  any  such  inference 
being  drawn  from  it,  a  disparity  of  order  being  on  the 
contrary  affirmed.  He  reasons  that  Jerome  having 
put  presbyters  on  a  level  with  the  apostles,  it  is  not 
strange  he  should  equal  them  with  bishops.  He  also 
relies  on  the  absence  of  any  account  of  any  presbyter 
taking  ill  the  promotion  of  one  of  his  brethren  to  sup- 
remacy, and  attributes  Jerome's  theory  to  a  jealousy 
on  his  part  of  the  order  of  deacons,  some  of  whom 
claimed  privileges  superior  to  those  of  the  presbyters, 
and  to  Jerome  having  as  a  presbyter  magnified  his 
order  to  equality  with  the  bishops  that  he  might  the 
better  raise  it  "  beyond  the  competition  of  the  deacons." 
His  view  of  the  Father^,  especially  of  the  first  three 

*  Smollett's  History,  ii.  107. 

9 


1 20 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


centuries.is  that  they  are  "  the  best  interpreters  of  the 
Scriptures."  He  quaintly  says  :  "  If  any  of  them  be 
thought  to  speak  sometimes  with  less  caution  or  to 
carry  their  expression  higher  than  might  have  been 
wished,  as  the  best  men  in  the  heat  of  disputation  or 
through  too  much  zeal  often  do,  all  candid  and  impartial 
readers  will  easily  be  persuaded  to  make  a  just  allow- 
ance for  it." 

In  1708,  Potter  was  appointed  to  succeed  Dr.  Jane 
as  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity  and  Canon  of  Christ 
Church,  which  brought  him  back  to  the  University, 
Jane  had  been  a  strong  High  Churchman  and  Tory. 
Twenty  years  before,  when  William  in.  was  trying  to 
carry  through  a  scheme  for  comprehension,  and  had 
appointed  a  Royal  Commission  to  prepare  matters  for 
the  consideration  of  Convocation  with  a  view  to  revise 
the  Liturgy  and  make  Canons,  there  had  been  keen 
opposition  between  the  Upper  and  Lower  Houses  of 
Convocation  over  the  royal  proposals,  and  there  had 
also  been  a  battle  royal  in  1689  over  the  election  of  a 
Prolocutor,  when  Jane  had  been  the  champion  of 
the  party  of  conservatism  against  Tillotson.  Jane 
had  had  as  his  assistant  in  the  Professorship  Dr. 
Smalridge,  a  man  like-minded  with  himself,  who 
had  discharged  his  duties  as  deputy  well.  The 
Queen  herself  was  much  perplexed  who  should  have 
the  Professorship,  and  among  those  nearest  to  the 
throne  there  was  the  strongest  divergence  of  opinion 
on  the  point.  Two  parties  were  just  now,  in  fact, 
struggling  for  the  first  place  in  Anne's  affections.  The 
Tory,  Harley ,  was  a  rival  to  Godolphin  and  Marlborough, 
and  Abigail  Hill,  afterwards  Mrs.  Masham,  Harley 's 
cousin,  a  soothing,  placid  character,  was  supplanting 
the  long  omnipotent  Duchess  Sarah.  "  It  was  on 
Church  matters  "  {Reign  of  Queen  Anne,  315),  says  Lord 
Stanhope,  "  above  all  that  Godolphin  and  the  Marl- 
boroughs,  Duke  and  Duchess,  mistrusted  the  insinua- 
tions of  Harley."    "  Her  Majesty,"  he  says  later,  "  re- 


1747]  QUEEN  ANNE'S  BISHOPS 


121 


garded  some  of  her  Ministers  as  latitudinarian  and 
rather  incHned  to  the  Tories,  whom,  according  to  the 
Duchess  of  Marlborough  herself,  she  usually  called  by 
the  agreeable  name  of  the  Church  party." 

Marlborough  pressed  that  Potter  should  be  made 
Regius  Professor,  and  for  some  weeks  the  matter  was 
in  suspense.  Potter  was  a  Whig  and  a  supporter  of 
William  iii.  and  the  Protestant  succession.  How,  said 
or  thought  Anne,  was  this  consistent  with  the  sound 
Church  views  he  was  said  to  possess  ?  Lord  Stanhope 
says  that  she  would  greatly  have  preferred  Smalridge. 
But  she  quailed  before  what  Lord  Stanhope  sarcasti- 
cally calls  Marlborough's  "  portentous  threat  "  :  "  If 
Dr.  Potter  has  not  the  Professor's  place,  I  will  never 
more  meddle  with  anything  that  may  concern 
Oxford." 

At  nearly  the  same  time  Anne,  without  consulting 
any  of  her  Ministers,  bestowed  the  sees  of  Chester  and 
Exeter  on  Sir  William  Dawes  and  Dr.  Blackball,  who, 
though  men  of  unblemished  characters,  were  Tories, — 
Divine-right  men,  and  as  such  had  openly  condemned 
the  Revolution.  So  strong  a  step  had  to  be  neutralised 
a  little,  and  thus  Potter,  and  not  Smalridge,  got  the 
Regius  Professorship. 

Godolphin  and  the  Marlboroughs  were,  however, 
much  upset  at  Blackball  and  Dawes'  promotion  : 
Harley  was  at  the  bottom  of  it,  they  were  sure,  and  the 
Queen  had  to  clear  herself.  She  writes  to  Marlborough, 
who  was  abroad  :  "I  believe  you  have  been  told,  as  I 
have,  that  these  two  persons  were  recommended  to  me 
by  Mr.  Harley,  which  is  so  far  from  being  true  that  he 
knew  nothing  of  it  till  it  was  the  talk  of  the  town.  I  do 
assure  you  these  men  were  my  own  choice.  They  are 
certainly  very  fit  for  the  station  I  design  ;  and,  indeed, 
I  think  myself  obliged  to  fill  the  Bishops'  Bench  with 
those  that  will  be  a  credit  to  it  and  to  the  Church,  and 
not  always  to  take  the  recommendations  of  the  Whig 
Government." 


122 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


But  the  Whigs  were,  as  Lord  Stanhope  says,  only 
half  appeased,  and  to  quiet  them  Anne  made  Trimnell, 
a  thorough  Whig  and  a  former  tutor  of  Sunderland, 
Bishop  of  Norwich.  Smalridge  was  Dean  of  Christ 
Church,  and,  it  is  interesting  to  note,  was  made  Bishop 
of  Bristol  in  1714,  holding  his  bishopric,  which  was  a 
poor  one,  with  his  deanery.  He  was  for  many  years  a 
leader  of  Oxford  Toryism,  and  so  stuck  to  his  principles 
that,  in  I7i6,when  George  i.  came  back  from  his  first 
visit  to  Hanover,  he  opposed  an  address  of  welcome 
to  the  King  on  the  ground,  among  others,  that  there 
would  be  no  end  of  addresses  should  one  be  presented 
every  time  His  Majesty  returned  from  Germany  ! 
He  and  Atterbury  were,  as  we  have  said,  the  only 
bishops  who  refused  to  sign  the  Archbishops'  Declara- 
tion against  the  Pretender  and  in  favour  of  the 
Hanoverian  Dynasty  in  1715. 

Shortly  afterwards.  Potter  married,  and  had  by 
his  wife  a  numerous  family,  of  some  of  whom  par- 
ticulars are  given  below.  His  wife  is  said  by  Wood, 
the  Oxford  antiquary,  in  his  Athence,  to  have  been  a 
granddaughter  of  Thomas  Venner,  the  fifth  monarchy 
man. 

1709  saw  the  trial  of  Sacheverell  with  its  immense 
popular  excitement,  and  in  this  and  the  following  years 
the  popularity  of  the  Church  was  at  its  height  in  the 
House  of  Commons  and  in  the  country.  171 3  saw  the 
devotion  of  the  coal  duties  to  the  building  of  fifty  new 
churches  in  London  and  Westminster.  17 14  saw  the 
triumph  of  Atterbury  and  Bolingbroke  in  the  passing 
of  the  Schism  Act,  which  forbade  a  Nonconformist  to 
keep  a  school  without  a  licence  from  the  bishop,  and 
which  was  repealed  early  in  George  the  First's  reign 
without  its  provisions  ever  having  been  put  into  opera- 
tion.^ 

In  1 71 5  Potter  completed  and  published  in  two 
volumes  an  edition  of  the  works  of  St.  Clement  of 

*  Perry,  ii.  285. 


1747] 


BISHOP  TALBOT 


123 


Alexandria.  This,  again,  is  a  work  of  learning  embody- 
ing the  corrections  of  Sylburgius  in  1592,  and  Heinsius 
in  1616. 

Burnet,  the  celebrated  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  died  on 
the  17th  March  1715.  There  seems  to  have  been  a 
little  dispute  among  the  dispensers  of  patronage  who 
should  succeed  him  at  Salisbury.  The  day  following 
Burnet's  death,  the  Lord  Chancellor  writes  to 
Wake  : 

"  Hearing  by  accident  yesterday  very  early  the 
death  of  the  late  Bishop  of  Sarum,  and  not  knowing 
your  Lordship's  thoughts  concerning  that  Bishoprick, 
I  immediately  did  what  I  could  to  help  the  Bishop  of 
Oxford  to  it,  knowing  he  had  lately  been  under  some 
disappointment ;  and  yesterday  about  one  o'clock  in 
the  House  of  Lords  I  was  told  from  a  good  hand  that 
ye  King  had  given  it  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  and  the 
Bishoprick  of  Oxford  to  Dr.  Potter.  This  pleased  me 
till  I  had  the  honour  of  yr  Lordship's,  which  hath  made 
me  dissatisfied  yt  my  little  endeavours  were  not  bound 
ye  way  most  agreeable  to  you.  I  yet  hope  for  another 
opportunity  of  repairing  this  misfortune,  being,  with 
perfect  sincerity,  my  Lord, 

yr  Lordship's  most  faithfull 

humble  servant, 

COWPER  C. 

"  I  will  not  be  sure  that  the  E.  of  N.'s  endeavours,  wh 
I  hear  are  very  pressing,  may  not  make  some  alteratn 
in  this  disposition." 

The  Bishop  of  Oxford  here  alluded  to  was  William 
Talbot.  He  was  related  to  Lord  Shrewsbury,  and  this 
fact  hastened  his  promotion.  He  had  preached  the 
sermon  at  George  the  First's  Coronation,  and  had  made 
a  telling  speech  in  Ministers'  favour  in  1707  on  the 
Union  with  Scotland  Bill.  He  was  the  father  of  Lord 
Chancellor  Talbot.  He  is  reviled  in  some  quarters 
for  his  friendliness  to  Clarke,  who,  though  accused  of 
Arian  views,  was  a  man  of  high  character,  and  Rundle, 


124 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


a  liberal  theologian  afterwards  Bishop  of  Derr}'.  We 
shall  tell  in  our  Life  of  Archbishop  Seeker  how,  through 
his  second  son,  Talbot  became  the  patron  and  friend 
of  the  great  Butler  as  well  as  of  Seeker  and  Benson, 
Bishop  of  Gloucester,  three  of  the  best  bishops  of  the 
eighteenth  century. 

So  Talbot  went  to  Salisbury,  and  Potter  was  raised 
to  the  Episcopate.  The  Marlborough  interest,  weakened 
from  what  it  had  been,  was  still  on  his  side,  and  his 
Whiggism,  High  Churchman  though  he  was,  was  beyond 
question. 

He  retained  his  Regius  Professorship,  and,  we  are 
told,  filled  both  his  important  stations  with  great 
reputation,  seldom  failing  to  preside  in  person  over 
the  disputations  in  the  schools,  and  regularly  holding 
his  triennial  visitations  in  St.  Mary's  Church,  where 
his  charges  were  "  forcible  and  adapted  to  the  circum- 
stances of  the  times." 

For  some  years  at  this  period  of  his  life  Potter 
suffered  from  a  severe  affection  of  the  eyes.  There 
were  printer's  errors  in  his  edition  of  Clement  which  were 
excused  on  the  ground  that  he  had  from  the  state  of 
his  eyes  to  entrust  the  correction  of  the  proofs  to  other 
hands,  and  in  his  letter  from  Cuddesden  to  Wake  in 
1 71 7  we  shall  see  that  he  refers  to  his  dependence  on 
other  men's  eyes. 

Not  unnaturally  Potter  was  a  frequent  preacher  at 
Court  now.  He  was  apparently  notified  by  the  arch- 
bishop or  his  official  that  he  had  been  put  in  the  list 
of  royal  or  Whitehall  preachers,  but  he  writes,  to  beg 
off,  from  Cuddesden ,  a  letter  dated  20th  December  1 7 1 6  : 

"  This  afternoon  I  receiv'd  the  honour  of  yr  Grace's 
letter.  I  would  not  omit  this  first  opportunity  of 
troubling  3^our  Grace  with  my  answer  tho'  I  am  at 
present  sick  of  a  fevour.  My  wife  expects  to  be  brought 
to  bed  some  time  in  January,  on  which  account  I  am 
in  hopes  His  Majesty  will  be  pleas 'd  to  excuse  my 
attendance  till  the  middle  or  later  end  of  February,  and 


1747]      CORRESPONDENCE  WITH  WAKE  125 


I  have  some  time  since  desir'd  the  Bisliop  of  St.  Asaph 
to  take  my  proxy.  Here  in  the  country  I  have  rather 
more  company  and  rather  less  leisure  than  at  Oxford  : 
beside  that  one  who  hath  lectures  to  compose  for  every 
term,  to  say  nothing  of  other  business,  cannot  be  sup- 
pos'd  to  have  much  time  to  spare.  But  as  there  are, 
beside  several  of  my  senior  Bishops,  two  of  the  juniors 
now  in  town,  who  never  appear'd  on  this  occasion,  and 
having  for  many  years  been  constant  Preachers  cannot 
be  unprovided,  I  hope  yr  Grace  will  not  be  under  the 
least  difficulty."! 

The  next  year  he  is  more  easily  induced  to  come  to 
his  Parliamentary  duties.  His  eyes  were  still  bad  :  he 
writes  to  Wake  : 

"  The  state  of  my  own  health  and  that  also  of  my 
family  hath  of  late  been  such  as  would  rather  have 
inclined  me  to  continue  some  time  longer  in  the  country, 
but  the  notice  which  your  Grace  was  pleas 'd  to  send  by 
Dr.  Castro,  and  the  letter  which  I  had  the  honour  to 
receive  from  you  by  the  last  post,  having  determin'd  me 
otherwise,  I  have  this  day  sent  to  a  friend  in  London  to 
take  a  house  for  me  as  soon  as  possible.  Just  before 
the  Session  of  Parliament  began  the  Bp.  of  Norwich  sent 
me  the  form  of  a  Proxy  desiring  me  to  sign  it,  which 
accordingly  was  done  ;  but  if  any  urgent  occasion  should 
happen,  I  could  go  to  London  from  this  place  in  a  day's 
time. 

"  CuDDESDEN,  \gth  March  1716." 

Potter  was  on  good  terms  with  Archbishop  Wake, 
and  there  are  in  the  Wake  MSS  many  letters  from 
Potter  to  the  Primate.  Potter's  attitude  throughout 
the  correspondence  is  one  of  respectful  submission  to 
his  ecclesiastical  chief.  Wake  was  the  bigger  man  of 
the  two,  but  in  their  opinions  on  Church  matters  they 
were  not  widely  separated  from  each  other.  Both 
were  mild  Whigs,  with  a  Whiggism  not  increasing  with 
advancing  years.  Both  were  scholars  and  would-be 
students.  One  letter  in  particular  from  Potter  to  Wake, 
dated  the   i8th  September  171 7,  and  written  from 

'  Wake  MSS,  1716. 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


Cuddesden,  gives  us  an  insight  into  the  type  of  mind 
that  Potter  had,  learned,  scholarly,  believing  in  a 
scholar's  methods,  fully  trusting  that  men  would  be 
swayed  by  arguments  rather  than  by  emotion  or 
feeling.  We  can  understand  how  such  qualities  might 
in  a  man  raised  to  the  Primacy  give  rise  to  the  charge 
made  against  Potter  of  dignified  coldness  and  lack  of 
sympathy.    The  letter  runs  : 

"  There  is  no  man  who  doth  more  heartily  concur 
with  yr  Grace  in  lamenting  the  present  unhapp}^  state 
of  the  Church  than  myself  when  so  many  of  chief  note 
even  among  the  clergy  do  either  openly  oppose  or  even 
covertly  undermine  as  well  her  principal  Doctrines  as 
the  most  essential  parts  of  her  authority  :  but  as  to 
the  power  of  requiring  all  persons  who  are  admitted 
into  Holy  Orders  or  Eccl  Benefices  to  give  proper 
assurances  of  their  sincerity  and  orthodoxy  in  the 
Xtian  Faith,  this  is  so  clear  in  itself  and  so  universally 
practis'd  in  all  churches  both  of  the  present  and  all 
former  ages  that  I  can  scarce  conceive  it  to  be  deny'd 
by  any  sensible  man  unless  on  one  of  these  two  accounts, 
viz.  either  that  he  thinks  the  church  to  be  no  true 
society  nor  to  have  any  power  over  its  own  members  ; 
or  that  he  disbelieves  some  of  the  doctrines  to  which 
his  assent  is  required.  As  to  the  former  of  these,  I 
have  said  a  good  deal  in  my  book  of  church  government ; 
and  tho'  in  the  writings  of  the  Bp  of  Bangor  and  others 
there  may  be  several  tacit  objections  to  some  parts  of 
it,  I  have  not  yet  seen  any  one  of  so  much  weight  but 
that  I  should  willingly  leave  it  to  the  judgment  of  any 
impartial  reader  who  would  be  at  the  pains  of  com- 
paring my  book  with  it.  As  to  the  later  sort,  among 
whom  I  reckon  Dr.  Clarke  because  his  book  against 
the  Xtian  Trinity  is  introduc'd  with  a  prevaricating 
method  of  eluding  his  subscription,  it  seems  to  me 
wholly  in  vain  to  endeavour  to  answer  them  any  other 
way  than  by  confuting  their  false  Doctrines  ;  for 
whatever  opinion  such  men  may  have  of  the  Church's 
authority  to  require  subscriptions,  they  will  never  be 
easy  while  they  look  upon  these  Doctrines  to  be  false 
to  which  their  subscription  is  required.  If  Dr.  Clarke 
had  not  first  disbeliev'd  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  or 
some  others  received  in  the  Church,  it  seems  probable 


1747]     "  A  SHORT  PLAIN  DISCOURSE  "  127 


to  me  that  we  should  never  have  heard  anything  of 
his  peculiar  way  of  subscribing.  I  confess  it  seems 
to  me  no  small  disgrace  to  us  that  after  the  Doctrine  of 
the  Trinity  (to  say  nothing  of  others)  hath  been  so 
publickly  attacked  for  several  years  together,  tho'  some 
replies  have  been  made  which  perhaps  neither  Dr. 
Clarke,  Mr.  Whiston,  nor  any  other  can  fully  answer, 
yet  no  just  treatise  hath  been  published  on  that  subject ; 
and  tho'  I  am  highly  sensible  of  my  own  inability,  I 
could  hardly  have  allowed  myself  to  be  silent  on  this 
and  perhaps  several  other  occasions  if  I  could  have 
hoped  to  complete  any  Treatise  which  would  have  been 
of  the  least  service  to  the  Church  by  the  help  of  my  own 
eyes,  but  the  depending  on  other  men's  eyes  is  a 
disadvantage  so  great  as  hath  discouraged  me  from 
undertakings  of  this  nature,  tho'  your  Grace  cannot 
suppose  me  to  be  wholly  at  leisure  who,  besides  the 
business  of  my  Bishoprick  and  all  other  affairs,  do 
constantly  read  Lectures  and  preside  at  all  Theological 
Disputations  while  I  am  in  the  country.  .  .  . 

"  I  shd  humbly  propose  to  your  Grace  whether  it 
may  not  be  convenient  that  some  person  should  write 
a  short  and  plain  discourse  which  should  not  exceed 
the  length  of  an  ordinary  sermon  to  show  how  reason- 
able and  necessary  it  is  that  all  clergymen  before  their 
admission  to  any  place  of  trust  in  the  Church  should 
give  some  proof  as  well  of  their  sincerity  in  believing 
the  Xtian  religion  and  its  chief  doctrines  as  of  their 
good  life  and  behaviour.  ...  I  should  rather  incline 
to  this  method  because  the  controversy  concerning  the 
Church's  authority  having  been  sufficiently  treated  of 
by  several  writers  now  many  years  since,  there  seems 
the  less  reason  to  renew  it  at  this  time,  especially  since, 
considering  the  present  disposition,  it  ought  to  be 
manag'd  with  the  utmost  prudence  and  tenderness,  and 
many  will  sooner  be  influenc'd  by  other  arguments 
than  those  which  are  fetch'd  from  the  Church's  power, 
which  they  do  not  love  to  hear  much  of .  .  .  . 

"There  are  also  several  other  subjects  which,  if 
treated  on  in  a  familiar  and  popular  way  as  some  of  the 
Occasional  Papers  were  formerly  written  under  the 
direction  of  yr  Grace's  predecessor,  might  probably  do 
good  service  at  this  time." 

He  was  prepared  to  support  the  archbishop  on  the 


128  JOHN  POTTER  [i737- 

repeal  of  the  Occasional  Conformity  Bill,  though  he  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  present  at  the  debates  in  the 
Lords.  In  the  very  midst  of  the  parliamentary  struggle 
over  it  he  writes  : 

"  The  last  week  I  was  preparing  to  go  to  London 
after  my  Ordination  as  well  in  obedience  to  your  Grace's 
commands  as  because  I  was  willing  to  give  my  Testi- 
mony on  the  occasion  which  now,  it  seems,  is  pass'd 
sooner  than  was  expected.  I  shall,  however,  be  ready 
to  follow  }T  Grace's  direction  whenever  my  presence 
shall  be  thought  wanting;  tho'  my  own  health  and 
inclination  might  lead  me  to  remain  here  in  the  country. 

"  Mr.  Maurice,  a  young  Master  of  Arts  of  Jesus 
College,  having  in  a  Sermon  before  the  University  said 
several  things  relating  to  the  Succession  authority  and 
Divine  Commission  of  the  Clergy,  Negative  Discourage- 
ments as  used  amongst  us,  etc.,  which,  tho'  perhaps 
fashionable  in  some  places,  were  very  displeasing  to 
that  audience,  was  called  before  the  Vice-Chancellour 
on  Wednesday  last,  and,  upon  his  persisting  to  defend 
all  that  he  had  said,  was  forbidden  to  preach  any  more 
within  the  Universit}^  till  he  slid  acknowledge  that 
several  expressions  in  his  sermon  were  disagreeable 
to  the  Doctrine  and  discipline  of  the  Church  of  England 
and  had  given  just  cause  of  offence  to  the  hearers." 

Meanwhile,  in  1 71  8,  Potter  had  held  his  first  triennial 
visitation,  and  in  his  charge  warned  his  clergj'  against  the 
errors  without  mentioning  the  name  of  the  notorious 
Hoadl}',  Bishop  of  Bangor.  He  thus  became  involved 
in  the  great  Bangorian  Controversy,  of  which  and  of 
its  author,  the  Bishop  of  Bangor,  we  propose  here  to 
give  some  account. 

Hallam,  in  his  Constitutional  History,  says:  "After 
turning  over  forty  or  fifty  tracts  and  consuming  a  good 
man}'-  hours  on  the  Bangorian  Controversy,  I  should 
find  some  difficulty  in  stating  with  precision  the  pro- 
position in  dispute."  In  fact,  ever}-  principle  that  has 
ever  been  at  issue  between  High  Churchmen  and  Broad 
Churchmen  was  at  issue.  Hallam 's  difficulty  was  not 
caused  by  any  defect  in  Hoadly's  literar\'  style.  He 


1747] 


HOADLY 


129 


was  a  clear  and  logical  writer  and  a  first-class  con- 
troversialist. Visitors  to  Winchester  Cathedral  may 
know  the  rather  heavy  features  depicted  in  Hoadly's 
tablet  on  the  north-west  pier  of  the  Central  Tower, 
but  for  nearly  half  a  century  no  one  in  the  Church  of 
England  was  a  more  conspicuous  figure,  and  the 
Bangorian  controversy  occupied  a  large  portion  of  the 
theological  and  ecclesiastical  field  in  England. 

Benjamin  Hoadly  was  born  in  1676  at  Westerham 
in  Kent .  His  father  became  Master  of  Norwich  Grammar 
School,  where  he  was  educated.  His  younger  brother 
John  rose  also  to  very  high  office  in  the  Church,  ending 
as  Archbishop  of  Dublin  and  then  of  Armagh.  Benjamin 
became  a  Fellow  of  St.  Katherine's  Hall  at  Cambridge, 
where  he  was  contemporary  with  Bishop  Sherlock. 
He  had  to  postpone  his  degree  for  seven  terms  from 
illness  ;  and  the  small-pox  and  a  mismanaged  strain 
while  at  Cambridge  made  him  a  partial  cripple  all  his 
life,  using  a  stick  abroad  and  crutches  at  home,  and 
always  obliged  to  preach  in  a  kneeling  posture.  But 
he  is  an  instance — many  may  be  found  in  history — 
of  a  man  whose  health  improved  as  he  got  older. 

He  became  Lecturer  of  St.  Mildred's,  Poultry,  in 
1701 .  He  "preached  it  down"  to  £20  a  year,  as  he  himself 
observed,  and  thought  it  high  time  to  quit  it.  In  1704 
he  was  made  Rector  of  St.  Peter  le  Poer,  London,  and 
in  1 7 10,  Rector  of  Streatham,  which  last  living  he 
retained  during  his  episcopates  of  Bangor  and  Hereford. 

He  seems  to  have  started  as  a  stalwart  Churchman, 
publishing  in  1703  the  reasonableness  of  Conformity 
to  the  Church  of  England  against  Calamy's  loth  Chapter 
of  the  Abridgment  of  the  Life  of  Baxter.  He  averred 
of  himself,  "  I  can  with  a  pure  conscience  conform," 
and  as  a  parish  priest  he  never  omitted  the  Athanasian 
Creed  when  it  was  ordered  to  be  read  in  Church. 
But  he  did  work  for  the  Whigs,  and  in  1710  the 
Sacheverell  year,  the  Commons  presented  an  address 
to  the  Queen,  "  to  bestow  some  dignity  of  the  Church 


I30 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


on  him  for  his  eminent  services  both  in  Church  and 
State."  Anne's  answer  was  that  she  would  take  a 
proper  opportunity  to  comply  with  their  desires,  but 
it  was  not  till  the  Crown  had  passed  to  George  i.  that  in 
171 5  he  was  made  Bishop  of  Bangor.  In  spite  of  his 
long  ailing  as  a  younger  man,  he  lived  to  be  eighty- 
five,  dying  in  the  Bishop  of  Winchester's  Palace  at 
Chelsea,  after  a  few  hours'  illness,  in  1761.  His 
biographer  attributes  his  green  old  age  to  his  driving 
every  day  in  the  open  air.  His  picture  by  his  first  wife, 
a  portrait  painter  of  some  reputation, — as  is  believed, 
touched  up  by  Hogarth, — is  in  the  National  Portrait 
Gallery. 

To  complete  our  character  of  Hoadly,  he  could 
only  be  called  a  good  bishop  when  the  standard  of 
episcopal  efficiency  was  very  low.  During  his  six 
years'  tenure  of  the  see  of  Bangor  he  never  set  foot  in 
his  diocese.  Though  Bishop  of  Hereford  for  two  years 
it  is  doubtful  whether  he  ever,  as  bishop,  visited  that 
diocese.  Of  his  three  sons,  two  were  incurably  addicted 
to  writing  and  performing  plays  :  yet  one  of  them,  the 
bosom  friend  of  Garrick,  in  view  of  his  father's  extensive 
patronage  as  Bishop  of  Winchester,  took  orders,  and 
his  father  saw  nothing  wrong  in  presenting  him  within 
a  few  months  to  four  or  five  livings  in  his  diocese,  and 
making  him  Chancellor  of  the  diocese  and  Prebendary 
of  the  Cathedral. 

It  is  fair,  however,  to  say  that  there  is  a  letter  from 
him  to  Wake,  dated  the  20th  November  1720,  which 
puts  him  in  a  better  light  as  chief  over  a  Welsh  diocese. 
He  speaks  of  a  clergyman  as  "  the  only  person  I  know 
or  can  hear  of  in  town  upon  whom  we  can  depend 
for  a  good  and  faithful  translation  of  the  Prayers  into 
Welsh.  I  have  seen  him  to-day,  and  find  it  all  in  great 
forwardness,  and  likely  to  be  done  with  so  exact  direc- 
tions, that  the  Clergy  may  not  be  at  a  loss  in  the  per- 
forming the  office."  He  seeks  Wake's  directions  as 
to  the  "  No.  to  be  printed."  — "  I  have  press'd  the 


1747] 


A  PRESERVATIVE" 


matter,"  he  says,  "  and  hasten'd  it  as  much  as  I  possibly 
could." 

With  Wake's  privity,  if  not  by  his  direction,  the 
Bishop  of  St.  Asaph  undertook  Confirmations  in  the 
Diocese  of  Bangor.  We  find  him  writing  to  the  Arch- 
bishop on  6th  August  1720  : 

"  I  had  the  honour  to  receive  yr  Grace's  letter  with 
another  enclosed  from  my  Lord  of  Bangor,  and  shall 
very  readily  comply  with  your  Grace's  desire  as  far  as 
conveniently  I  can.  I  am  afraid  I  shall  not  be  able 
to  go  this  year  into  ye  remote  parts  of  ye  Diocese  of 
Bangor  :  but  shall  be  willing  to  go  into  such  places 
as  are  not  very  far  distant  ones,  and  if  the  same  occasion 
shd  require  it  another  year,  I  shall  be  ready  to  go,  God 
willing,  and  do  ye  same  office  in  ye  remoter  parts  of 
that  Diocese.  I  write  this  post  to  my  Lord  of  Bangor, 
to  direct  him  to  order  his  Chancellor,  or  some  other 
proper  person,  to  call  upon  me  that  we  may  agree  upon 
such  times  and  places  as  shall  be  judg'd  most  proper  for 
me  to  confirm  in  this  year." 

The  immediate  occasion  of  Hoadly's  publishing  the 
first  of  his  works  that  caused  a  stir,  called  A  Pre- 
servative against  the  Principles  and  Practices  of  the 
Nonjurors  both  in  Church  and  State,  or  an  appeal  to 
the  Consciences  and  Common  Sense  of  the  Christian 
Laity,  was  the  publication  of  some  posthumous  papers 
by  Hickes,  which  set  forth  "  the  constitution  of  the 
Catholic  Church  and  the  nature  and  consequences  of 
Schism."  Hickes  was  a  man  of  learning,  and  the 
leader  of  the  militant  nonjurors.  All  the  original 
nonjuring  bishops  were  dead  by  1712,  in  which  year 
Wagstaffe,  who  had  been  consecrated  with  Hickes  as 
suffragan  bishops,  died.  Hickes  himself  died  in  171 5. 
The  Whig  Ministers  objected,  as  was  natural,  to  Hickes' 
sentiments.  Who  was  more  fitted  to  answer  them  than 
the  Whig  clerical  protagonist  recently  promoted  to 
the  episcopal  bench  ?  Hoadly  complains  that  the 
nonjurors  showed  little  gratitude  for  the  thirty  years' 
toleration  they  had  enjoyed.    "Now,"  says  he,  "  they 


132 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


open  the  scene  for  which  the^^  have  been  long  preparing 
in  a  more  covered  and  private  way,  .  .  .  the  establish- 
ment is  now  openly  and  directly  charged  with  the  want 
of  all  right.  The  nonjurors'  cause  is  now  publicly 
declared  to  be  the  cause  of  God.  The  Church  is  made 
a  principal  part  of  the  argument.  The  words  unity, 
schism,  altar,  excommunication,  damnation,  and  the 
like,  are  thrown  about  in  such  a  manner  as  to  confound 
the  understanding  of  honest  men  of  low  capacities." 

He  considers  the  foundation  of  the  difference 
between  the  two  parties.  In  the  year  1688,  says  he, 
"  the  whole  nation  of  Protestants,  universally  and 
equally,  felt  and  saw  themselves  on  the  brink  of 
destruction  .  .  .  after  having  warded  off  the  present 
threatening  ruin,  nothing  remained  but  to  secure  us 
from  the  return  of  the  same  evils  of  popery  and 
slavery."  ...  "  This  was  done  with  the  greatest 
regard  to  the  constitution  of  the  kingdom,  and  with 
the  least  deviation  from  the  common  rule.  The  popish 
branches  of  the  royal  family  were  set  aside  upon  no 
other  consideration  than  the  safety  of  the  whole  nation. 
And  the  very  first  Protestant  branches  in  the  same 
royal  family  were  declared  heirs."  He  goes  on  to  say 
that  from  the  refusal  to  take  the  oaths  and  the  depriva- 
tion of  some  of  the  bishops  and  clergy,  arose  these  two 
main  principles  that  our  princes  upon  this  Protestant 
establishment  can  have  no  right  to  the  Crown,  and  hence 
two  points  of  practice,  the  one  the  adhering  to  the  popish 
line,  the  other  the  adhering  to  the  communion  of  the 
deprived  bishops,  and  the  treating  of  our  churches  as 
no  churches. 

On  31st  March  171 7,  Hoadly  preached  before  the 
King,  in  the  Chapel  Royal  at  St.  James's,  his  sermon 
on  St.  John  xviii.  36  :  "  My  Kingdom  is  not  of  this 
world."  It  is  said  that  Government  suggested  if  not 
invited  following  up  the  Preservative  by  a  public 
utterance  on  the  same  lines,  as  they  wanted  public 
opinion  just  then  roused  in  favour  of  the  repeal  of  the 


1747]         CONVOCATION  ON  HOADLY  133 


Schism  and  Test  Acts.  In  his  sermon,  Hoadly's 
position  was  that  individual  sincerity  was  the  sole 
requirement  of  a  Christian  ;  a  visible  church  and 
membership  of  it  were  unimportant  if  not  misleading. 
The  High  Church  clergy  were  furious,  and  a  good  many 
who  were  thoroughly  loyal  to  the  Hanoverian  Suc- 
cession were  shocked  at  the  bishop's  attitude  to  the 
visible  Church.  The  Lower  House  of  Convocation  ap- 
pointed a  Committee,  consisting  of  Sherlock,  Dean  of 
St.  Paul's,  and  eight  other  divines,  to  report  on  the 
Preservative  and  Sermon.  They  drew  up  a  Representa- 
tion, in  which  they  stated  that  the  tendency  of  the  two 
works  was  conceived  by  them  to  be  : 

"  First,  to  subvert  all  government  and  discipline  in 
the  Churcla  of  Christ,  and  to  reduce  His  Kingdom  to  a 
state  of  anarchy  and  confusion. 

"  Secondly,  to  impugn  and  impeach  the  regal 
supremacy  in  cases  ecclesiastical,  and  the  authority  of 
the  legislature  to  enforce  obedience  in  matters  of  religion 
by  civil  sanction." 

The  document  was  called  the  Representation  of  the 
Lower  House.  Hoadly  took  the  point  that  it  was  the 
work  of  a  Committee  only,  and  whether  it  was  ever 
adopted  by  the  House  seems  doubtful.  That  it  repre- 
sented the  view  of  a  majority  of  the  House  is  not  doubt- 
ful, but  Stanhope  and  his  colleagues  were  not  going  to 
have  their  episcopal  champion  condemned  even  by 
the  Lower  House. 

The  report  was  ready  on  the  loth  May,  but  before  it 
was  presented  to  the  Upper  House,  Convocation  was 
prorogued,  Mr.  Hore  says,  by  special  order  of  the  King 
until  the  22nd  November.  Hoadly  was  charged  with, 
but  indignantly  denied,  having  applied  for  this  proro- 
gation. But  Convocation  never  got  any  further  licence 
to  proceed  to  business,  and  remained  in  abeyance  till 
its  revival  in  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

Outside   Convocation   the   controversy  continued 


134 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


and  was  conducted  with  great  bitterness,  and  feeling 
ran  verj'-  high.  The  Court  stuck  by  Hoadly,  and  he 
received  his  final  promotion,  viz.  to  Winchester  in  1734. 
Quite  early  in  the  course  of  the  strife  Snape  and  Sher- 
lock, as  two  of  his  leading  opponents,  were  struck  off 
the  list  of  Royal  Chaplains. 

Our  friend,  Bishop  Nicholson  of  Carlisle,  got  himself 
involved,  and  involved  deeply,  in  a  quarrel  which  arose 
out  of  the  controversy.  Snape  in  a  published  letter 
suggested  that  Hoadly  before  preaching  his  sermon 
showed  it  to  a  friend,  to  satisfy  whom  some  qualifying 
words  were  introduced  into  the  discourse.  Hoadly 
denied  this,  and  asserted  that  the  sermon  was  preached 
without  the  knowledge  of  any  living  man.  Pressed, 
Snape  asserted  that  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle  knew  the 
individual  who  had  suggested  the  modification.  On 
further  pressure  this  came  out  to  be  White  Kennet, 
Dean  and  then  Bishop  of  Peterborough.  This  White 
Kennet  indignantly  denied  ;  on  the  ist  July  171 7 
he  solemnly  declares  in  a  letter  to  Wake  : 

"It  is  my  duty  to  assure  yr  Grace,  as  I  solemnly 
do  in  the  presence  of  God,  that  I  knew  nothing  of  the 
late  sermon  of  the  Bishop  of  Bangor  before  the  preach- 
ing of  it  :  that  I  never  read  or  saw  the  MSS  notes  or 
it,  and  that  I  never  was  advis'd  with  nor  ever  oflfer'd 
my  advice  about  any  matter  or  any  one  word  in  it. 
And  therefore  it  is  amazement  and  grief  to  me  that  the 
good  Bishop  of  Carlisle  should  at  last  fancy  me  to  be 
the  author  of  such  a  story  as  is  couch'd  in  an  Advertise- 
ment dated  Eton,  28th  June  171 7." 

For  a  month  or  two  clerical  circles  were  deeply 
stirred  over  the  question  of  the  suggested  amendments 
in  the  sermon.  The  High  Churchmen  and  some  of 
the  Moderates  sided  against  Hoadly  and  credited 
Nicholson's  story.  On  the  13th  July  171 7,  Gibson 
gives  Wake  his  view  : 

"  Some  conversation  there  probably  was  between 
the  Preacher  and  the  Dean.    The  sermon  afterwards 


1747] 


HOADLY'S  PROMOTION 


135 


when  it  came  out  appear'd  to  be  duly  guarded  ;  and 
ye  Dean  might  naturally  think  and  say  that  the  guard- 
ings  were  the  effect  of  ye  conversation. 

"  I  think  there  are  two  things  still  wanting  on  ye 
part  of  the  Dean  :  the  first,  to  declare  honestly  what 
he  meant  by  telling  ye  Bishop  of  Carlisle  that  he  could 
point  out  the  occasion  of  his  mistake  ;  the  second, 
what  was  ye  conversation  between  ye  Bishop  of  Bangor 
and  him  after  preaching  and  before  printing. 

"  By  ye  Bishop  of  Bangor's  advertisement  we 
seem  to  be  far  from  ye  end  of  this  foolish  squabble. 
The  disservice  it  does  ye  whole  order  is  soe  very  great 
that  one  would  hope  the  Bishop  of  Bangor  and  ye  rest 
shd  be  persuaded  to  let  drop  it  and  let  it  dye  on  that 
consideration.  At  present  he  seems  to  be  ye  warmest 
of  all  ye  four  Combatants." 

On  the  15th  July  171 7  he  writes  again  : 

"  Methinks  some  of  ye  great  men  at  Court  shd  be 
prevail'd  with  to  lay  their  commands  on  ye  favourite 
Bishop  to  put  an  end  to  it." 

Feeling  ran  so  high  between  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle 
and  the  Dean  of  Peterborough  that  on  their  happening  to 
be  on  the  same  day  at  Gibson's  Palace  at  Buckden,  they 
had  to  be  kept  apart,  and  one  of  them  to  be  persuaded 
to  take  his  dinner  at  the  inn. 

The  honours  given  or  wished  to  be  given  to  Hoadly 
by  the  Court  made  his  brother  bishops,  even  the  Whigs 
amongst  them,  a  little  jealous.  Even  the  level-headed 
Gibson  writes  to  Wake  on  25th  July  1717  : 

"  Can  ye  Ministry  find  noe  way  to  content  my  Bro. 
Hoadly  and  his  friends  but  by  affronting  the  whole 
Bench  of  Bishops  at  once  ?  ...  Is  it  possible  for  men 
that  think  to  hazard  ye  loss  of  nine  parts  in  ten  of  ye 
Whig  clergy  b}''  an  unaccountable  fondness  for  one 
man  ?  " 

Nor  after  the  lapse  of  four  or  five  years  did  Hoadly's 
advancement  from  Bangor  to  Hereford  in  1721  fail  to 
rouse  some  resentment  among  his  critics  :  the  Bishop 

ID 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


of  Peterborough  writes  on  the  9th  September  1721  to 
the  Archbishop  : 

"  The  vacancy  of  Hereford,  if  our  papers  be  true, 
will  put  the  friends  of  the  Bishop  of  Bangor  upon 
solliciting  His  Majesty  to  doe  a  not  popular  thing." 

The  rest  of  the  letter  is  of  public  interest  as  showing 
the  popular  feeling  about  that  time.  "  The  people," 
says  the  writer,  "  are  ver}'  easy,  not  at  all  inclin'd 
to  any  new  Government,  not  much  desirous  of  a  new 
Ministry,  and  even  very  indifferent  about  a  new 
Parliament." 

The  task  of  confronting  Hoadly  must  have  been 
a  congenial  one  to  Potter.  For  Hoadly's  attack  on 
the  political  principles  of  the  Nonjurors,  Potter,  as  a 
consistent  Whig  and  upholder  of  the  Protestant  Han- 
overian Succession,  may  have  felt  sympath}^  ;  but  the 
principles  of  the  sermon  were  opposed  to  the  system 
of  teaching  Potter  valued.  At  the  request  of  his  clergy 
his  charge  of  1718  was  published.  Hoadly  found  no 
difficulty  in  fitting  on  the  cap  though,  as  we  have  said, 
neither  his  name  nor  the  title  of  his  publications  was 
mentioned  in  the  charge  ;  and  immediately  published 
an  answer  in  which  he  recriminates  his  brother  of 
Oxford,  against  whose  charges  he  seeks  to  vindicate 
himself.  Potter,  in  a  letter  to  his  clergy  in  17 19,  re- 
plied to  the  reply  and  severely  reprobated  Hoadly's 
treatment  of  him,  particularly  as  Potter  had  reprobated 
principles,  not  individuals.  So  the  merry  fight  waxed 
on.  It  was  six  or  seven  years  before  the  fires  of  the 
Bangorian  controversy  had  smouldered  out.  Mean- 
while Hoadly  was  an  invaluable  ally  to  Ministers  in 
the  Lords.  With  the  Commons,  however,  he  was  not 
popular,  and,  in  171 7,  they  invited  Snape  of  Eton,  his 
antagonist,  to  preach  before  them.  It  is  to  be  re- 
marked that  in  his  answer  Hoadly  declares  that  Potter 
gave  him  more  concern  as  an  adversary  than  any  one. 

Potter's   attitude   in   the   Bangorian  controversy 


1747]     DEANERY  OF  CHRIST  CHURCH  137 


approved  itself  to  the  orthodox  and  High  Church  clergy. 
In  the  course  of  the  next  year  Archbishop  Wake,  while 
taking  the  waters  at  Bath,  gets  from  his  chaplain,  the 
Rector  of  Lambeth,  a  report  of  matters  of  interest. 

"  The  Lord  Bishop  of  Oxford  in  his  charge  to  his 
Clergy  on  his  visitation  this  summer  spoke  very  fully 
and  excellently  against  the  false  notions  of  the  Bp.  of 
Bangor  and  Dr.  Clarke.  No  discourse  was  ever  heard 
on  such  an  occasion  with  more  general  satisfaction  and 
applause  in  all. parts  of  his  Diocese.  His  Lordship  was 
earnestly  desir'd  to  print  it  :  but  he  hath  hitherto 
modestly  excusd  himself  from  complying  with  this 
Request." 

In  September  1719  the  Deanery  of  Christ  Church 
fell  vacant  by  the  death,  after  a  short  illness,  of  that 
stout  old  Tory,  Smalridge,  who  held  the  Bishopric  of 
Bristol,  worth  then  only  £700  a  year,  with  his  deanery. 
Potter  writes  on  the  29th  September  announcing  the 
dean's  death  to  the  archbishop.  The  Christ  Church 
men  did  not  want  an  outsider  to  be  made  dean  ; 
Fell  had  been  both  dean  and  bishop  together,  and 
very  soon  the  suggestion  was  made  that  Potter, 
remaining  Bishop  of  Oxford,  should  be  made  Dean  of 
Christ  Church.  Wake  thought  highly  of  Potter,  and 
wrote  from  Bristol,  where  he  was  taking  the  waters,  in 
support  of  the  proposal.  Atterbury,  who  was  a  Christ 
Church  man,  and  had  been  dean  before  Smalridge, 
wrote  expressing  the  opinion  that  Potter  was  the  best 
man.  Potter  himself  seems  to  have  favoured  the  pro- 
posal but  mildly  ;  on  the  2nd  October  1719  he  wrote 
to  Wake,  giving  him,  as  he  says,  "  my  own  thoughts 
about  it."  "  On  Sunday,"  he  goes  on,  "  the  following 
letter  was  brought  to  me  by  Mr.  Brooks,  the  Chapter 
Clerk  of  Christ  Church  : 

"  '  May  it  please  yr  Lordship. 

"  '  Since  it  hath  pleas 'd  God  to  take  away  the  Bishop 
of  Bristol  our  Dean  of  Christ  Church,  we  make  it  our 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


humble  request  for  the  good  of  ye  House,  yr  Lordship 
will  be  pleas 'd  to  use  yr  utmost  interest  to  succeed 
him  in  that  Deanery.'  " 

This  was  signed  by  the  sub-dean,  the  treasurer,  and 
two  of  the  canons.  They  were  all  the  canons  then  in 
the  college,  but  were  prepared  to  answer  "  for  the  sense 
of  those  which  were  absent." 

Potter  expressed  his  own  idea  that  his  health  was  so 
uncertain  that  he  doubted  his  sufficiency  for  the  task  of 
maintaining  discipline.  The  Chapter  asked  him,  should 
he  decline  the  deanery,  to  support  Egerton — a  canon 
and  one  of  the  signatories  of  the  letter — as  a  candidate 
for  the  post.  From  his  letter  Potter  seems  to  have 
been  pressed  by  the  Ministry  to  accept  the  deanery. 
He  says  :  "  There  are  three  considerations  which  might 
move  me  in  it.  These  are  the  profit,  the  convenience  in 
other  respects,  and  the  good  which  may  be  done  in  it." 
As  to  the  first,  he  calculates  that  the  deanery  is  better 
by  £300  a  year  than  the  Regius  Professorship,  which 
would  be  swallowed  up  in  the  extra  entertaining  required 
of  one  who  was  at  once  bishop  and  dean.  On  the 
second  head,  Cuddesden  was  more  healthy  than  "  to 
be  cloyster'd  up  in  a  College."  Lastly,  he  "  feared 
much  lest  the  discipline  of  this  great  college  shd  suffer." 

One  can  hardl}^  understand  the  shrinking  from  the 
responsibilities  of  the  headship  of  a  large  college  on  the 
part  of  one  who,  when  he  was  nearly  twenty  years 
older,  accepted  the  limitless  labours  of  the  Anglican 
Primacy.  How  the  matter  fell  out  is  recorded  in  a 
letter  from  Hanover  from  the  Prime  Minister,  the  Earl 
of  Sunderland,  to  Wake,  dated  27th  October  1719  : 

"  I  have  the  honour  of  yr  Grace's  letter  from  Bristoll, 
which  I  laid  before  the  King,  who  has  order'd  me  to 
acquaint  yr  Grace  that  having  receiv'd  the  post  before 
the  account  of  the  Bishop  of  Bristoll 's  death  he  had 
allready  declar'd  his  intention  of  making  Dr.  Boulter 
Bishop  ;  and  considering  the  smallness  of  the  Bishop- 
rick,  of  making  him  also  Dean  of  Christ  Church,  which 


1747] 


BILL  AGAINST  BLASPHEMY 


139 


post  requires  a  man  of  integrity  and  courage  ;  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford  is  certainly  very  honest  and  very 
well  qualified  ;  butt  the  King  thought  it  not  so  proper 
to  have  the  same  person  Bishop  and  Dean  of  the  same 
Church,  especially  since  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  is  full 
as  easy  in  his  present  preferments  ;  otherwise  the 
King  would  be  very  glad  to  shew  the  regard  he  has  to 
him  both  upon  his  own  meritt  as  well  as  your  Grace's 
recommendation . ' ' 

In  March  and  April,  as  we  have  recorded,  Wake  was 
busy  over  the  Bill  against  blasphemy  and  profaneness. 
He  could  count  on  Potter's  support,  though  the  latter 
seems  to  have  been  anxious  not  to  leave  his  diocese. 
He  writes  to  the  archbishop  from  Cuddesden  on  the 
14th  April  : 

"  I  have  here  enclos'd  my  Proxy,  wh  I  humbly 
desire  your  Grace  to  accept.  Nevertheless,  if  by  my 
personal  appearance  I  could  in  the  least  contribute  to 
the  service  of  the  Church  or  of  His  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment and  the  Protestant  Succession,  or  to  relieve  the 
Sufferers  in  the  South  Sea,  especially  the  Proprietors 
of  the  Redeemable  Annuities,  of  whom  I  have  been 
sometimes  sorry  and  indeed  surpriz'd  to  hear  great  men 
speaking  with  so  little  regard,  I  should  not  fail  on  a 
very  short  notice  to  return  to  London.  But  as  these 
and  all  other  good  ends  may  for  anything  which  appears 
to  me  be  as  well  answer'd  by  your  Grace  having  my 
Proxy  as  by  my  own  presence,  I  hope  that,  unless  any- 
thing unexpected  happens,  I  may  be  permitted  to  attend 
my  Duty  here  in  my  Diocese." 

On  4th  May  1721,  referring  to  the  archbishop's 
failure  to  carry  the  Bill,  Potter  writes  : 

"  I  perceive  that  yr  Grace  had  no  opportunity  to 
make  use  of  my  name,  and  am  therefore  sorry  that  I 
could  not  attend  in  person  to  bear  my  Testimony  on 
this  memorable  occasion,  but  I  am  glad  to  find  that  you 
cannot  say,  as  another  good  Bishop  did,  No  man  stood 
with  me.    May  God  forgive  those  who  forsook  you." 

Three  days  later  he  writes  again  : 

"  I  am  very  sensible  that  several  clauses  in  the  Bill 


I40 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


might  have  been  amended,  but  your  Grace,  I  doubt  not, 
apprehends  that  no  such  alteration  wd  have  made  it 
pass  ...  I  rather  hope  that  this  attempt,  tho'  unsuc- 
cessful!, will  create  in  them  "  (the  opponents  of  the  Bill, 
persons  "  averse  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  ")  "  a 
fear  that  something  of  the  kind  will  be  brought  to  pass 
on  the  first  favourable  conjuncture.  ...  I  expect, 
tho'  absent,  to  have  a  small  share  in  any  ill-treatment 
wh  your  Grace  may  meet  with  on  this  occasion,  neither 
shall  I  think  it  for  my  credit  to  escape  it." 

Potter  followed  Wake's  lead  in  the  Quakers'  Affirma- 
tion Bill  in  January  1722,  the  proceedings  on  which  we 
have  referred  to  in  Archbishop  Wake's  Life. 

The  glimpses  we  get  of  Potter  from  his  letters  to 
Wake  in  the  course  of  1722  show  him  a  zealous  Diocesan. 
He  excuses  himself  from  attending  Parliament  on  the 
nth  March,  saying,  that  he  had  been  obliged  to  return 
the  preceding  week  to  his  diocese,  "  where,"  says  he, 
"  there  waited  for  me  between  thirt}'  and  forty  candi- 
dates for  orders  whom  I  could  not  oblige  to  come  to 
London  without  great  inconvenience."  He  adds  that 
he  is  obliged  to  attend  the  exercises  in  the  Divinity 
School  at  least  three  days  in  the  next  week. 

Although  another  dozen  years  or  more  elapsed 
before  he  was  moved  from  Oxford,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  he  was  by  this  time  high  in  the  favour  at 
any  rate  of  the  Princess  of  Wales  and  indeed  of 
Ministers. 

On  the  23rd  Apiil  1722  he  writes  again  to  Wake 
from  Cuddesden,  to  know  whether  he  should  come  to 
town  at  the  opening  of  Parliament.  Lord  Sunderland 
had  died  suddenly  a  few  days  before.  Potter  goes  on 
to  say,  "  Before  I  left  London  the  Lord,  who  hath 
since  paid  his  debt  to  Nature,  very  much  pressed 
me  to  take  the  place  formerly  mentioned  chiefly 
on  account  of  His  Majestj'^'s  service  ;  on  my  refusal, 
made  a  general  olfer  of  anything  else  which  would  be 
more  acceptable,  to  which  I  onty  reply'd  that  I  had 
always  left  things  of  that  nature  to  my  superiors." 


1747] 


ATTERBURY 


141 


The  latter  part  of  1722  was  full  of  rumours  of  a  con- 
spiracy against  the  Hanoverian  Dynasty.  Atterbury, 
Bishop  of  Rochester,  was  charged  with  treasonable 
correspondence  with  the  Pretender  and  his  supporters 
in  France.  He  was  seized  with  his  papers,  examined 
by  a  Committee  of  the  Council  and  lodged  in  the  Tower. 
In  the  year  before  a  very  learned  and  interesting  corre- 
spondence had  passed  between  Potter  and  Atterbury 
respecting  the  time  when  the  four  Gospels  were  written. 
When  he  came  to  prepare  his  Defence  on  his  im- 
peachment before  the  Lords,  Atterbury  wished  to  use 
the  fact  of  his  having  been  engaged  in  questions  of  this 
kind  at  the  time  his  enemies  said  he  was  deep  in  treason- 
able schemes,  and  asked  Potter's  testimony  on  the  fact 
of  their  correspondence. 

Potter,  on  the  29th  April  1723,  writes  to  Wake  : 

"  I  think  I  acquainted  your  Grace  that  in  summer 
last  I  receiv'd  several  letters  fromthe  Bishop  of  Rochester, 
containing  (besides  matter  of  form  and  ceremony) 
nothing  but  inquiries  relating  to  the  Holy  Scriptures 
concerning  which  he  desir'd  to  have  my  thoughts  .  .  . 
the  producing  these  letters  will  in  the  bishop's  condition 
much  contribute  to  his  justifican,  they  being  a  proof 
that  at  the  time  of  writing  them,  that  is  in  June,  July, 
and  August  last  his  time  and  thoughts  were  employed 
in  studies  agreeable  to  his  sacred  character,  and  he 
therefore  desires  I  would  be  present  at  the  House  of 
Lords  to  testify  my  liaving  receiv'd  them.  As  to  this 
last  I  have  excused  myself,  but  that  I  may  not  be  blamed 
for  having  suppress 'd  anything  which  the  Bishop 
thinks  necessary  for  his  Defence,  I  have  thought  my- 
self oblig'd  to  send  my  Secretary  with  the  original 
letters  except  one  whereof  I  have  sent  a  '  copy,'  the 
original  having  been  returned." 

He  does  not  wish  the  archbishop  to  be  surprised 
when  he  hears  his  name  mentioned.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  Atterbury  did  refer  to  his  communications  with 
Potter  in  his  speech  to  the  Lords. 

Potter  does  not  from  the  Parliamentary  Reports 


142 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


appear  to  have  taken  any  further  part  in  the  impeach- 
ment or  condemnation  of  his  brother  of  Rochester. 

In  observance  of  ecclesiastical  rules,  Potter  was  for 
strictness. 

On  8th  October  1723  he  writes  to  Wake  complaining 
of  Letters  Testimonial  given  to  clergy  not  complying 
with  the  Rules  promulgated  b}'  the  archbishop  in  17 16. 
The  writer  hopes  he  has  made  those  given  at  Oxford 
better  than  they  were,  though  "  this  has  given  him 
trouble,  many  men  being  tenacious  of  their  custom 
whether  good  or  bad."  He  complains  of  the  Cam- 
bridge Testimonials.  One  given  him  by  a  Candidate 
at  his  last  ordination  has  "  not  only  the  College  seal 
wanting  but  the  date  "  ;  they  do  not  "  certify  of  their 
personal  knowledge,"  nor  give  the  occasion  on  which 
the  Testimonial  was  given,  nor  "  specify  any  time  of  the 
person's  good  behaviour."  A  few  days  later  there  is 
another  letter  from  Cuddesden,  in  which  he  says  : 

"As  to  my  coming  to  Parliament  ...  I  shall  be 
and  always  have  been  ready  to  do  so  when  there  was 
the  least  appearance  of  occasion  for  my  being  there  ; 
and  should  that  be  reall}'  true  which  the  Princess  has 
said  not  only  to  me  but  to  Mrs.  Potter  and  perhaps 
also  to  others  oftener  than  once,  that  I  am  usually  the 
last  to  come  to  town  and  the  first  to  leave  it  ;  I  say, 
should  this  be  so,  the  true  reason  has  been  that  for 
several  3-ears  past  I  have  found  I  could  be  altogether 
as  serviceable  both  to  the  Church  and  State  whilst  I 
remain 'd  here  in  the  country  as  in  town." 

At  the  beginning  of  the  next  3-ear  he  republished 
his  Church  Government .    He  reports  : 

"  My  Discourse  of  Church  Govermnent  having  been 
so  much  out  of  Print  that  scarce  a  single  Copy  could 
be  found  in  any  of  the  Shops,  and  the  West  Indians 
have  desir'd  that  a  considerable  number  should  be  sent 
to  their  Plantations,  the  Booksellers  who  have  the 
property  of  the  Copy  have  again  reprinted  it.  There  is 
no  material  alteration  in  this  Edition." 


John  J'iiitkr 


1747] 


MACCLESFIELD 


143 


Bishop  Potter  took  part,  and  apparently  was  inter- 
ested, in  the  trial  of  Lord  Chancellor  Macclesfield  in 
1 725,  to  which  we  have  referred  in  the  Life  of  Archbishop 
Wake.  We  may  add  here  that  he  was  impeached  by 
the  Commons,  tried  for  thirteen  days  before  the  Lords, 
found  guilty  by  a  unanimous  vote  of  ninety-three  Peers, 
and  condemned  to  pay  a  fine  of  ;{;3o,ooo,  having,  of 
course,  before  his  trial  resigned  his  Chancellorship. 
The  charges  against  him  were  chiefly  selling,  or  con- 
niving at  the  sale  of  Masterships  in  Chancery,  by 
himself  when  the  office  was  vacant,  by  one  master  to 
another,  and  conniving  at  the  irregular  if  not  fraudulent 
practices  of  masters  with  funds  in  court.  His  defences 
were,  no  personal  corruption,  that  the  law,  as  inter- 
preted by  what  was  the  practice,  "  allowed  what  I  did." 

No  doubt  the  South  Sea  Bubble  had  turned 
people's  heads  by  ideas  of  utterly  extravagant  profits 
to  be  made.  But  the  sentence  against  him  was 
unanimous  ;  and  though  the  proposal  made  just  after- 
wards, that  he  should  stand  disqualified  for  any 
public  employment,  was  lost,  the  voting  on  it  being 
equal,  forty-two  on  each  side,  he  never  came  back 
to  public  life. 

Potter  as  well  as  Wake,  according  to  the  Parlia- 
mentary Reports,  voted  for  his  conviction,  as  did  fifteen 
other  bishops.  The  question  was  put  to  the  Peers 
on  the  25th  May  ;  two  days  before,  we  find  Potter 
sending  Wake  the  order  of  the  House  giving  the  terms 
in  which  the  question  was  to  be  put — as  to  which  Potter 
seems  to  have  felt  some  difficulty.    His  letter  runs  : 

"  Is  Thomas,  Earl  of  Macclesfield,  guilty  of  High 
crimes  and  misdemeanour  charged  on  him  by  the 
Impeachment  of  the  House  of  Commons  ?  And  the 
answer  thereto  shall  be  pronounced  by  each  Guilty  or 
Not  Guilty,  upon  His  Honour  laying  his  right  Hand 
upon  his  Breast. 

"  My  Lord, — I  have  here  sent  your  Grace  the 
order  of  the  House  wherein  there  may  seem  to  be 


144 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


some  ambiguit}'-  ;  but  the  Impeachment  being  ante- 
cedent to  the  Articles  dehver'd  in  by  the  Commons, 
I  submit  it  to  your  Grace  whether  the  Lord  may  not  be 
guilty  of  the  crimes  in  the  Impeachment  tho'  innocent 
of  several  articles. 

"  Your  Grace  also  will  observe  that  it  is  High  Crimes y 
etc.,  and  not  the  High  crimes, 

"  May  23,  1725." 

Wake's  endorsement  is  : 

"  In  Sacheverell's  tryall  the  Articles  are  made  the 
charge.  After  reciting  ym,  they  say,  All  wch  crimes  and 
misdemeaners  the  Comms  are  ready  to  prove, — and  that 
the  sd  H  S  by  preaching  the  sermons  and  publishing  the 
Books  (in  wch  these  articles  are  contd)  hath  most 
grievously  offended. 

"  And  they  pray  that  he  ma}''  be  put  to  answer  all 
the  premises  and  such  proceeding  had  thereon  as  is 
agreeable  to  law  and  Justice." 

Still  referring  to  the  very  articles,  two  letters  from 
Cuddesden  to  the  archbishop,  dated  respectively  the 
29th  August  1725  and  the  19th  July  1726,  though  of  no 
grave  importance,  give  us  an  insight  into  Potter's 
habits  of  thought,  and  show  his  respect  for  his  chief. 

"  I  have  not  troubled  your  Grace  since  I  left  London. 
.  .  .  Some  time  since  I  finish'd  the  visitation  of  my 
Diocese ,  the  hurry  whereof,  together  with  a  cold ,  gave  me 
a  small  fever.  At  Oxford  I  had  a  very  good  sermon 
preach 'd  by  one  of  the  Proctors  of  the  University,  who 
hath  a  living  in  my  Diocese  in  defence  of  the  Church's 
authority  to  impose  subscriptions,  which,  if  it  be  printed 
as  it  was  intended  to  be,  will,  I  doubt  not,  meet  with 
your  Grace's  approbation. 

"  Perhaps  your  Grace  ma}'  not  yet  have  been  informd 
that  one  of  the  Physicians  lately  chosen  into  one  of 
Dr.  Radcliffe's  Fellowships,  was  oblig'd  to  leave  a 
considerable  Foundation,  whereof  he  was  a  member 
because  he  would  not  make  the  Subscription  requir'd 
by  Law.  Whether  he  can  iiold  this  Fellowship  without 
Subscribing  as  is  directed  by  the  Act  of  Uniformity, 
your  Grace  can  far  better  judge  than  I  am  able  to  do  ; 


1747] 


A  STRICT  RULER 


145 


but  if  on  the  account  of  his  nonconformity  he  hath 
exchang'd  a  Fellowship  of  fifty  or  sixty,  for  another 
of  three  iiundred  pounds  per  annum,  it  is  easy  to  see 
what  encouragement  this  will  give  to  others  who  are 
less  modest  and  sincere  than  this  young  man  is  said 
to  be." 

His  strictness  in  matters  of  Ecclesiastical  Rule  is 
illustrated  by  the  following  : 

"  CuDDESDEN,  igth  July  1726. 

"  Dr.  Bertie  of  All  Souls,  having  a  friend  who 
intends  to  present  him  to  a  living  vacant  ever  since  the 
twelfth  of  April,  as  soon  as  he  shall  be  qualified  for  it, 
hath  desir'd  me  to  admit  him  into  Deacon's  orders 
extra  tempora,  and  afterwards  into  that  of  Priests.  It 
hath  never  been  my  practice  to  ordain  privately  without 
your  Grace's  approbation." 

So  he  asks  for  Wake's  consent,  or  the  refusal  of  it. 

George  i.  died  in  June  1727,  and  on  the  i  ith  of  the 
following  October,  George  11.  and  his  consort.  Queen 
Caroline,  were  crowned  at  Westminster  with  great 
pomp.  Potter  had  by  this  time  become  a  prelate  of 
known  learning,  honesty,  and  discretion,  and  a  favourite 
of  the  Queen.  As  such  he  was  selected  to  preach  the 
Coronation  sermon,  which  was  published  by  special 
Royal  Command.  He  was  evidently  the  object  of 
the  Queen's  special  favour,  and  marked  out  for  further 
promotion.  There  was  a  good  deal  of  commotion  in 
Episcopal  circles  in  1734,  caused  by  the  death  of  Willis, 
Bishop  of  Winchester.  Hoadly  had  been  much  used 
by  Ministers  and  the  Court,  to  prevent  the  Presby- 
terians revolting  from  Walpole  on  his  refusal  to  repeal 
the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts  ;  and  if  we  are  to  believe 
Hoadly 's  letter  to  Lord  Hervey,  he  had  been  promised 
Winchester  as  a  reward.  Potter,  Lord  Hervey 's  Memoirs 
states,  "  a  great  favourite  of  the  Queen's,  strongly 
solicited  it,"  and,  as  Walpole  told  Hervey,  would  certainly 
have  attained  it,  had  not  the  promises  to  Hoadly 


146 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


been  so  strong.  Anyhow,  Hoadly  got  it,  and  Potter 
remained  at  Oxford. 

We  are  now  approaching  Potter's  appointment  to 
Canterbury,  and  the  circumstances  attending  his 
appointment  require  our  attention.  They  are  gathered 
mainly  from  Lord  Hervey's  Memoirs  of  the  reign  of 
George  11.  Hervey  was  a  man  of  strong  Hkes  and 
dislikes,  not  favouring  Church  principles,  rather  a 
gossip,  and  allowance  must  be  made  accordingly  ;  but 
his  position  at  Court,  and  his  intimacy  with  the  King 
and  Queen,  enabled  him  to  know  the  facts. 

On  the  Episcopal  Bench,  as  it  existed  in  1737,  a 
leading  figure  undoubtedly  is  Gibson,  Bishop  of  London. 
We  have  seen  and  heard  much  of  him  in  Wake's  Life, 
and  as  we  know  he  had  been  chaplain  to  Archbishop 
Tenison,  and  on  Wake's  promotion  to  Lambeth,  had 
succeeded  him  at  Lincoln,  being  in  1720  moved  on  to 
London.  Gibson  was  a  strong  Churchman,  a  learned 
and  scholarly  man  with  great  influence  among  the 
clergy.  For  some  years  before  his  death.  Archbishop 
Wake  was  too  old  and  infirm  to  attend  to  business, 
and  Gibson  was  Walpole's  chief  adviser  and  helper  in 
ecclesiastical  affairs.  His  influence  with  the  clergy 
enabled  him  to  keep  them  quiet  ;  and  Walpole,  who 
had  a  keen  recollection  of  the  noise  and  smoke  of  the 
Sacheverell  trial,  desired  nothing  less  than  to  revive 
those  fires,  and  was  grateful  to  Gibson  accordingly. 
Walpole  was  reviled  at  for  making  him  a  Pope.  "  And 
a  very  good  Pope  he  is,"  replied  the  Minister.  Gibson's 
Codex  Juris  Ecclesiastici  Anglicani  is,  says  Mr.  Hore,  the 
established  repertory  of  the  statutes  and  usages  affect- 
ing the  English  clergy.  His  pastoral  letters,  says  the 
same  author,  were  those  of  an  earnest  and  profoundly 
religious  prelate.  His  orthodoxy  was  beyond  question  : 
"  he  prevented  Dr.  Rundle,"  says  the  Editor  of  Nichols' 
Illustrations  of  Literature  (iii.  478),  "  though  strongly 
patronised  by  Lord  Chancellor  Talbot,  from  being  an 
English  bishop,  on  account  of  some  unguarded  expres- 


1747]     HIS  QUARREL  WITH  WALPOLE  147 


sions  he  had  used,  relating  to  Abraham's  offering  of  his 
son  Isaac."  No  one  can  have  read  over  the  large 
number  of  letters  to  the  archbishop  from  Edmund 
Lincoln,  beginning  in  1716  till  1723,  when  the  signature 
in  the  clear  handwriting  changes  to  Edmund  London 
and  goes  on  thus  for  five  or  six  years,  without  being 
struck  with  the  clear  headedness  and  grasp  shown  by 
the  writer.  It  was  generally  expected  that  on  Wake's 
death,  Gibson  would  go  to  Canterbury.  But  before 
that  he  had  fallen  out  with  Walpole  over  the  Quaker 
Relief  Bill,  and  his  promotion  to  the  primacy  was 
not  to  be. 

It  had  been  the  policy  of  the  Whigs  and  Walpole 
to  help  the  Dissenters,  but  not  too  much.  Walpole's 
view,  however,  was  that  the  Quakers  had  a  strong 
grievance.  Parliament  had  given  them  some  relief 
despite  the  opposition  of  Atterbury,  but  it  was 
thought  that  it  was  still  unjust  to  proceed  against  them 
in  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts  for  the  non-payment  of 
tithes  and  ecclesiastical  dues  and  to  fine  and  imprison 
them.  What  they  wanted  was  not  to  get  out  of  paying 
tithes,  but  as  they  could  only  pay  under  compulsion, 
to  have  that  compulsion  of  the  least  uncongenial  kind — 
a  justice  of  the  peace  instead  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Court. 
Walpole  thought  so.  The  Bishop  of  London  then 
lived  in  Whitehall  and  Walpole  had  just  moved  to 
Downing  Street.  Hervey's  story  is  that  Gibson  called 
to  thank  Walpole  for  his  assistance  in  defeating  the 
Test  Act,  and,  without  mentioning  the  Quakers'  Bill, 
went  to  a  meeting  of  the  bishops,  where  it  was  resolved 
to  rouse  the  clergy  throughout  the  country  to  petition 
against  the  Quakers'  Bill.  The  Bill  passed  the  Commons 
but  was  thrown  out  in  the  Lords  by  fifty-five  to  thirty- 
five.  Walpole  never  forgave  Gibson  this,  and  com- 
plained bitterly  to  the  Queen  of  his  conduct  and  of  that 
of  Sherlock  who  had  supported  him. 

Sherlock,  then  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  had  been  a 
favourite  of  the  Queen,  though,  like  Gibson,  a  strong 


148 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


Churchman.  Hervey  says  that  Sherlock  had  counted 
if  Gibson  had  gone  to  Canterbury  on  succeeding  him  in 
London,  and  when  Gibson  was  out  of  the  way  seems  to 
have  even  thought  he  might  have  the  Primacy  himself ; 
but  Sherlock  had  offended  in  the  same  way  as  Gibson, 
and  Walpole  ruled  them  both  out,  telling  the  Queen, 
according  to  Lord  Hervey,  that  the  feeling  of  the  House 
of  Commons  was  so  strong  against  Sherlock  as  likely 
to  carry  Church  power  very  high,  that  should  she  send 
him  to  Canterbury  she  must  call  a  new  Parliament, 
Walpole  himself  had  leanings  towards  Hare,  who 
had  been  his  tutor,  but  Hervey,  according  to  his  own 
account,  advised  against  him  and  constantly  urged  both 
on  the  Queen  and  Walpole  the  claims  of  Potter.  When 
Walpole  had  expressed  to  Hervey  ^  the  difficulty  of 
selecting  a  Primate,  the  latter,  according  to  his  own 
account,  said  :  "  Sure,  sir,  you  have  had  enough  of 
great  geniuses  ;  why  can  you  not  take  some  Greek  or 
Hebrew  blockhead  that  has  learning  enough  to  justify 
the  preferment  and  not  sense  enough  to  make  you 
repent  of  it."  "  Potter  is  a  man,"  said  Hervey  to 
Walpole  about  this  time,  "  of  undoubted  great  learning, 
of  as  little  doubted  probity.  He  has  been  always, 
though  reckoned  a  Tory  in  the  Church,  uninterruptedly 
attached  to  this  family  without  the  lure  or  reward  of 
any  preferment  but  this  poor  Bishopric  of  Oxford,  where 
he  has  stuck  for  twenty  years.  The  Queen  loves  him, 
his  character  will  support  you  in  sending  him  to  Lambeth, 
and  his  capacity  is  not  so  good  nor  his  temper  so  bad 
as  to  make  you  apprehend  any  great  danger  in  his  being 
there." 

So  Potter  got  the  Primacy.  One  of  Potter's  first 
duties  as  archbishop  was  to  attend  on  her  death-bed 
the  illustrious  Queen  to  whom  he  so  largely  owed  his 
elevation  to  the  Primacy.  We  are  indebted  to  Lord 
Hervey 's  voluminous  memoirs  for  our  knowledge  of  the 
details  of  Queen  Caroline's  ten  days'  illness.  Lord 
^  Hervey's  Memoirs,  108. 


1747] 


QUEEN  CAROLINE 


149 


Mahon  sees  some  reason  for  mistrusting  some  of  Hervey 's 
strange  stories  of  this  period,  and  they  should  prob- 
ably be  taken  with  reserve.  The  Queen's  malady  was 
painful  and  steadily  increased  in  gravity.  Had  its  true 
nature  been  known  even  the  crude  surgery  of  the  i8th 
century  would  probably  have  relieved  her.  But  she 
had  a  strange  wish  for  keeping  it  a  secret,  and  by  the 
time  the  surgeons  knew  about  it,  they  could  do  little 
but  add  to  her  pain  and  discomfort  by  small  operations. 
George  11.  had  two  good  points  only:  (i)  freedom  from 
personal  cowardice  ;  (2)  his  love  and  esteem  for  his  clever, 
superior  wife.  So  far  as  a  man  such  as  he  was — a 
husband  habitually  unfaithful,  after  the  manner  of  his 
time  and  upbringing — selfish,  stupid,  and  conceited, 
could  love  and  esteem  a  wife  such  as  she  was,  he  did  so. 
He  was  thoroughly  grieved  and  alarmed  at  her  serious 
illness,  but  he  bullied  her  and  scolded  her  nearly  the 
whole  time  she  lay  dying  :  "  Why  can't  you  lie  still  ?  " 

Caroline  was  a  religious  woman.  She  had  not  been 
brought  up  a  Churchwoman  :  she  had  felt  difficulty 
about  conforming  entirely  to  the  rule  of  the  Church  of 
England  in  the  matter  of  receiving  the  Communion. 
She  was  intellectually  strong  ;  on  some  points  her 
religious  faith  may  have  wavered,  and  the  abstract 
theological  discussion  she  loved  may  not  have  removed 
her  doubts.  But  she  met  death  as  a  Christian  woman 
would.  A  few  days  before  her  death  some  persons 
about  the  Court  suggested  that  she  ought  to  have  some 
clergyman  to  pra}^  with  her.  Through  her  daughter. 
Princess  Emily,  the  suggestion  that  the  Archbishop 
should  be  sent  for  was  carried  to  the  King  and  Queen. 
Potter  came,  and  continued  afterwards  to  pray  by  her 
morning  and  evening ;  "at  which  ceremony,"  says 
Hervey,  "  her  children  always  assisted."  According  to 
a  letter  from  Charles  Ford  to  Swift,  she  received  the 
Sacrament  at  Potter's  hands  :  but  this  is  not  beyond 
doubt.  Whether  she  felt  that  she  could  not  sincerely 
receive  it  as  a  sincere  and  convinced  Churchwoman, 


I50 


JOHN  POTTER 


I1737- 


or  whether  the  want  of  an  outward  reconcihation  with 
her  ill-conditioned  son,  the  Prince  of  Wales,  caused  a 
difficulty,  we  cannot  say  :  the  conclusion  of  Mr.  Croker, 
the  editor  of  Hervey,  is  that  she  did  not  receive  it. 
Certain  it  is  that  the  archbishop  continued  to  attend 
her  morning  and  evening,  and  that  the  last  word  she 
ever  spoke  was  "  Pray." 

Less  than  a  year  after  Queen  Caroline's  death  the 
archbishop,  as  an  official  personage,  attended  the  birth 
of  George  iii.  The  Prince  of  Wales,  Frederick,  had  been 
turned  out  of  St.  James's  Palace  by  his  father  the  year 
before,  and  was  then  living  at  Norfolk  House,  St.  James's 
Square.  The  house  in  which  George  iii.  was  born  was 
pulled  down  in  1742,  when  the  present  house  was  built 
on  its  site.  Here  the  monarch  whose  wisdom,  or  the 
lack  of  it,  was  to  affect  for  so  many  years  the  well-being 
of  millions  of  people  of  British  birth,  first  saw  the  light, 
arriving  with  such  improvident  haste  that  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  was  the  only  great  personage  of 
State  who  was  in  time  to  be  present  at  the  birth. 
So  little  promise  did  the  royal  infant  give  of  long  life 
that  he  was  privately  baptized  at  1 1  o'clock  the  same 
evening  by  Seeker,  Bishop  of  Oxford,  then  Rector  of  St. 
James's,  afterwards  archbishop. 

Perhaps,  having  regard  to  their  having  been  com- 
petitors for  the  Primacy,  there  remained  a  little  tension, 
if  not  jealousy,  between  Potter,  while  archbishop, 
and  Gibson,  Bishop  of  London.  In  the  summer  of 
1 740  a  marriage  was  arranged  between  Prince  William 
of  Hesse  Cassel  and  the  Princess  Mary,  daughter  of 
George  11.,  and  a  question  arose  at  the  Council  as 
to  the  solemnisation  of  the  marriage.  The  archbishop 
and  the  bishop  each  claimed  the  right  to  officiate. 
George  11.  refused  to  have  the  bridegroom  over  here, 
though  he  favoured  the  marriage.  If  there  were  an 
actual  marriage  in  London,  the  Bishop  of  London, 
as  Dean  of  the  Royal  Chapel  of  St.  James's,  would 
officiate.    If  there  were  merely  a  solemn  contract  of 


1747] 


THE  GIN  ACT 


espousals  this  would  be  a  matter  really  for  a  Secretary 
of  State.  Prayers,  a  Benediction,  and  a  Latin  address 
might  be  added,  but  these  would  properly  fall  to  the 
archbishop  as  head  of  ecclesiastical  affairs.  The 
archbishop's  view  seems  to  have  prevailed. 

The  interference  of  the  Episcopal  Bench  in  the 
debates  of  the  House  of  Lords  at  this  period  appears  to 
have  been  infrequent .  In  the  Parliamentary  Proceedings 
for  1737,  8,  and  9,  only  Bishop  Hoadly  of  Salisbury  is 
reported  as  a  speaker.  He  spoke  on  two  occasions — (i) 
on  the  case  of  Porteous,  so  well  known  to  readers  of 
Scott's  Heart  of  Midlothian ;  (2)  in  support  of  the 
convention  with  Spain.  In  the  three  succeeding  years 
he  is  almost  the  only  bishop  who  is  reported  to  have 
intervened.  I  cannot  find  that  Potter  ever  spoke  in 
the  House  of  Lords  during  his  Primacy  nor  during  his 
twenty-two  years'  tenure  of  the  Bishopric  of  Oxford. 

In  1742  a  series  of  animated  debates  took  place  in  the 
House  of  Lords  on  a  Bill  introduced  by  Ministers,  dealing 
with  the  sale  of  and  duties  on  gin  and  other  spirituous 
liquors.  Potter  does  not  appear  to  have  spoken,  but 
he  voted  with  all  the  other  bishops  present  against  the 
Bill.  The  matter  stood  in  this  way.  In  1731,  Parlia- 
ment, at  the  instigation  of  Sir  Joseph  Jekyll,  had  passed 
the  Gin  Act.  At  this  time  drunkenness  had  increased 
among  the  lowest  orders,  especially  the  drinking  of  gin,  on 
which  hitherto  only  a  very  small  duty  had  been  imposed, 
and  which  was  sold  without  licence  by  persons  whose 
ordinary  trade  was  unconnected  with  the  liquor  traffic. 
The  Justices  of  Middlesex  had  petitioned  Parliament 
against  the  evils  arising  from  this  widespread  consumption 
of  gin  or  Geneva.  So,  on  the  motion  of  the  benevolent 
Jekyll,  a  heavy — for  the  lower  orders,  a  prohibitive — 
duty  was  put  on  gin.  Walpole  had  and  expressed  mis- 
givings about  the  measure.  So  heavy  a  duty  would  be 
evaded,  he  thought — and  the  revenue  would  be  a  loser. 

Alas,  as  sometimes  happens,  philanthropic  intentions 
failed.  Walpole 's  somewhat  chilling  anticipations  were 
II 


152 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


realised  ;  informers  were  afraid  to  inform  and  justices 
would  not  convict.  The  consumption  of  gin  increased 
and  was  more  shameless  than  ever  ;  no  licences  were 
obtained  and  no  duty  paid.  Retailers  set  up  painted 
boards  inviting  people  to  be  drunk  for  a  penny,  dead 
drunk  for  twopence,  and  have  straw  for  nothing.  The 
drinking  dens  were  haunts  of  hideous  immorality 
and  bestial  vice.  To  stop  this,  ministers  brought  in  a 
Bill  to  reduce  the  licences  and  to  have  the  duties  also 
reduced.  Their  idea  was  to  have  a  small  duty  per 
gallon  on  spirits  at  still  head  and  a  licence  at  20s.  B}'' 
these  it  was  hoped  the  price  of  gin  by  retail  would  be 
moderately  but  really  raised.  Thus  the  law  would  be 
enforced  and  the  revenue  would  gain.  Two  bishops, 
Seeker  of  Oxford  and  Sherlock  of  Salisbury,  spoke 
against  it,  asserting  that  it  would  mean  a  return  of  the 
worst  sights  which  had  been  common  before  the  Gin 
Act  of  1736,  and  all  the  bishops  opposed  it.  The  Bill 
passed,  however,  by  a  great  majority.  Smollett  remarks 
(xi.  141) :  "  We  cannot  help  owning  that  it  has  not  been 
attended  with  those  dismal  consequences  which  the 
Lords  in  the  opposition  foretold." 

In  1742  the  great  Walpole  fell,  and  the  direction  of 
foreign  affairs  passed  into  Carteret's  hands.  He  was  a 
capable  but  not  a  successful  Minister.  Europe  was 
unfortunately  embroiled  in  the  war  of  the  Austrian 
Succession.  The  main  dispute  of  the  war  was  to 
determine  whether  Maria  Theresa  should  be  allowed, 
on  the  death  of  her  father,  the  Emperor  Charles  vi., 
to  succeed  to  his  dominions.  France  supported  the 
Elector  of  Bavaria's  claim  to  part  of  them,  and 
Frederick  11.  of  Prussia  took  the  opportunity  of  claiming 
Silesia.  George  11.,  if  not  the  English  people,  was 
warmly  interested  in  Maria  Theresa's  cause.  He  was 
Elector  of  Hanover  as  much  as  King  of  England,  and 
dreaded  France  getting  the  upper  hand  in  Germany. 
In  1743  he  took  the  field  against  the  French,  and  won 
a  victory  at  Dettingen  on  27th  June  in  that  year,  for 


1747]   THE  BROAD  BOTTOMED  MINISTRY  153 


which  Handel  wrote  his  Dettingen  Te  Deum.  He 
returned  to  England  after  a  few  months,  and  on  the 
17th  November  we  find  Potter,  whose  health  had  begun 
to  fail  and  who  was  hard  on  seventy,  writing  to  him  : 
"  poor  subject  and  servant,  unable  to  pay  his  personal 
attendance,  most  humbly  begs  leave  to  congratulate 
y'  Majesty  on  y'  happy  arrival  after  your  ever  memor- 
able and  glorious  campaign."  ^ 

The  glorious  campaign  had,  however,  by  no  means 
finished  the  war  on  the  Continent .  The  English  were  sus- 
picious that,  to  please  the  King,  Carteret  was  spending 
English  money  for  Hanover  rather  than  England's  sake. 
The  war  was  a  visitation  from  which  deliverance  should 
be  sought  ;  and  Potter,  with  the  piety  which  was  sincere 
in  him,  and  reflecting  the  national  feeling,  writes,  on 
15th  December  1743,  to  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  Secretary 
of  State,  that  he  is  still  unable  to  pay  his  personal  attend- 
ance, and  asks  him  "  to  put  the  King  in  mind  that  every 
year  since  the  war  began  there  had  been  a  Day  of 
Publick  Fasting  and  that  the  same  is  again  generally 
wished  and  expected."  2  In  1 744,  Carteret  was  succeeded 
by  Henry  Pelham  and  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  in  the  Broad 
Bottomed  Administration.  The  war  on  the  Continent 
continued  to  give  Ministers  anxiety,  and  Potter  rightly 
reminds  Newcastle,  on  ist  October  1744,"  of  the  Annual 
Fast  for  the  following  winter  or  spring."  ^ 

In  1744  we  may  mention  that  during  a  debate  on  a 
Bill  to  prevent  correspondence  with  the  Pretender's  sons, 
a  pointed  appeal  was  made  to  the  Episcopal  Bench  for 
their  views — mainly,  it  would  seem,  on  the  issue  whether 
the  sins  of  a  father  should  be  publicly  visited  on  his 
children  ;  but  it  was  Seeker  of  Oxford  who  responded 
to  the  appeal,  answering  the  question  in  the  afBrm- 
ative. 

In  1745,  of  course,  the  position  was  aggravated,  and 
the  question  became  not  whether  the  English  or  the 

'  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32701,  f.  264. 
*  Ubi  supra,  f.  314.  '  Vbi  supra,  f.  337. 


154 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


French  were  to  win  a  victory  in  the  Netherlands, 
though  Marshal  Saxe's  victory  at  Fontenoy  on  the 
I  St  May  1745  stimulated  our  enemies,  but  whether 
Britons  at  home  were  safe  from  invasion,  and  was  the 
Government  which  Parliament  had  set  up  nearh^  fifty 
years  before  to  be  maintained  or  overthrown.  In 
reading  the  history  of  the  period  we  must  remember 
that,  though  the  vast  majority  of  Englishmen  were 
resolved  to  uphold  the  Hanoverian  Dynasty  and  the 
Protestant  succession,  there  were  people,  and  not  a  few 
in  such  a  place  as  Oxford,  who  were  not  loj'al  to  the 
King.  There  was  a  King's  cause  to  be  supported,  and 
when  you  made  a  bishop  or  a  judge  you  had  to  consider 
whether  your  nominee  was  the  King's  friend.  As  we 
read  the  correspondence  of  Newcastle — for  twenty-five 
years  or  more  the  arch-dispenser  of  patronage — we  are 
struck  how  repeatedly  the  claim  of  the  applicant  for 
some  preferment  is  based  on  his  being"  stanchly  favour- 
able to  the  person  and  government  of  the  King,"  and 
on  the  fact  that  by  his  appointment  the  cause  of  the 
King's  friends  will  be  strengthened  in  the  county  or  the 
district. 

We  have  described  in  the  Life  of  Archbishop 
Herring  Charles  Edward's  Rebellion  in  1745,  since  he 
had  so  active  a  part  in  crushing  it.  It  is  sufficient  here 
to  say  that  before  the  summer  of  1 746  began  the  Rebellion 
was  over.  The  archbishop,  in  May  1746,  encloses  to 
Newcastle  the  form  of  address  which  Convocation  seeks 
to  present  to  the  King,  saying  that  the  whole  clergy 
having  in  their  several  dioceses  addressed  His  Majesty 
at  the  beginning  of  the  Rebellion,  the  Minister  thought 
an  address  from  Convocation  "  would  be  enough  now."  ^ 

The  Scottish  peers  who  had  taken  part  in  the  Rebel- 
lion and  who  had  not  been  pardoned.  Lords  Kilmarnock, 
Cromarty,  and  Balmerino,  were  to  be  tried  for  treason  in 
the  House  of  Lords.  At  the  end  of  July  1746,  Potter's 
age  and  infirm  health  made  him  anxious  to  be  excused 
'  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32707,  f.  204. 


1747] 


BISHOPS  FOR  AMERICA 


attendance  at  the  trial.  "  I  do  indeed  go  abroad,"  he 
says, "  but  am  not  able  to  pay  so  long  an  attendance  as  on 
such  an  occasion  may  perhaps  be  requisite."  ^  A  day  or 
two  later  he  writes  that,  "  the  Duke  being  now  returned 
and  the  Rebellion  ended,  a  day  of  Solemn  Thanksgiving"  ^ 
should  be  appointed. 

In  regard  to  appointing  bishops  for  the  American 
colonies,  a  burning  Church  question  for  the  first  three- 
quarters  of  the  eighteenth  century.  Potter  took  a  sound 
Church  view.  He  writes  to  Newcastle  on  loth  March 
1745/6: 

"The  bishops  last  year  requested  your  grace  'that 
the  members  of  our  Church  in  the  American  Plantations, 
where  they  are  very  numerous  and  do  probably  con- 
stitute a  much  larger  body  than  all  the  other  inhabitants 
of  those  Provinces  together  considered,  might  be  per- 
mitted to  have  bishops  and  thereby  favoured  with  an 
opportunty  of  receiving  Confirmation  and  Holy  Orders 
in  their  own  country  without  the  necessity  of  coming 
to  England,  which  many  of  them  have  attempted  to  do 
to  their  great  hazard  and  expense  and  some  to  the  loss 
of  their  lives.' 

The  ten  years  of  Potter's  archiepiscopate,  1 737-1 747, 
were  very  important  years  in  the  lives  of  John  and 
Charles  Wesley,  and  in  the  development  of  Methodism 
as  a  separate  ecclesiastical  organisation.  In  1738 
John  Wesley  returned  from,  and  Whitfield  went  to, 
Georgia  ;  in  1739  John  Wesley  built  his  first  chapel 
at  the  Foundry  ;  in  1741  he  first  regularly  employed 
unordained  licensed  preachers  ;  in  1744  the  first 
Wesleyan  Conference  met  at  the  Foundry  Chapel, 
London.  It  was,  no  doubt,  not  till  1 760  that  his  licensed 
lay  preachers  began  to  administer  the  sacrament  at 
Norwich  ;  but  this,  which  Charles  Wesley  called 
"  the  Rubicon,"  was  but  the  inevitable  result  of  what 
had  been  long  in  preparation,  and  John  Wesley  seems 

•  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Biit.  Mus.,  32707,  f.  480. 
'  Ubi  supra,  f.  561.  *  Ubi  supra,  32706,  f.  282. 


156 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


to  have  been  the  only  leading  man  who  was  blind  to 
the  goal  for  which  he  was  making. 

The  account  of  Potter's  interview  with  John  and 
Charles  Wesley  is  well  known.    The  brothers  had 
about  this  time,  1738,  an  interview  with  Gibson,  the 
Bishop  of  London  ;  they,  in  fact,  voluntarily  waited  on 
him  to  justify  their  conduct.    One  of  the  main  points 
discussed  was  the  doctrine  of  Assurance,  on  which  the 
learned  and  pious  bishop  had,  and  could  have,  no 
objection  to  the  view  that  a  Christian  man,  after  ex- 
amining his  life  and  weighing  his  own  sincerity,  might 
be  conscious  that  he  was  in  a  state  of  salvation  and 
could  hardly  be  without  such  an  assurance  ;  but  this 
hardly  satisfied  his  interviewers,  who  required  a  more 
enthusiastic  confidence.    There  was  also  much  dis- 
cussion on  the  Wesleys'  right,  without  episcopal  per- 
mission, to  baptize,  and  particularly  to  re-baptize,  Dis- 
senters.   The   bishop  was   against   such  re-baptism, 
and  the  interview  ended  with  the  bishop  giving  them 
leave  to  come  again.    A  few  weeks  later  Charles  called 
on  the  bishop  to  tell  him  he  had  so  re-baptized  a  woman 
who  was  dissatisfied  with  her  baptism  by  a  Dissenter. 
The  bishop  disapproved,  and  a  sharp  discussion  fol- 
lowed.   In  the  end  the  bishop  had  to  remind  Charles 
that  he  had  no  licence  to  officiate  in  the  diocese  at  all, 
and  was  liable  to  inhibition.    "  Do  you  now  inhibit 
me?  "  was  the  rather  bad-tempered  reply.    "  Oh,  why 
will  you  push  matters  to  an  extreme  ?  "  answered  the 
bishop  ;  and  he  had  to  cut  short  the  interview  by  say- 
ing, "  Well,  you  knew  my  judgment  before,  and  you 
know  it  now."    Soon  afterwards  they  waited  on  Potter 
without  a  summons  to  justify  themselves.    "  He  showed 
us,"  says  Charles,  "  great  affection,  and  cautioned  us 
to  give  no  more  umbrage  than  was  necessary  for  our 
own  defence,  to  forbear  exceptionable  phrases  and  to 
keep  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Church."    We  told  him 
we  expected  persecution  would  abide  by  the  Church 
till  her  articles  and  homilies  were  repealed .    He  assured 


1747]  POTTER'S  HAUTEUR 


1S7 


us  he  knew  of  no  design  in  the  governors  of  the  Church 
to  innovate  ;  neither  should  there  be  any  innovation 
while  he  lived.  It  was  probably  at  this  time  that  this 
"  great  and  good  man,"  as  Wesley  calls  the  archbishop, 
gave  him  advice  for  which  he  acknowledged  many 
years  afterwards  that  he  had  ever  since  had  occasion 
to  bless  God.  "  If  you  desire  to  be  extensively  useful, 
do  not  spend  your  time  and  strength  in  contending 
for  or  against  such  things  as  are  of  a  disputable  nature, 
but  in  testifying  against  open  notorious  vice,  and  in 
promoting  real  essential  holiness."  ^  S.  T.  Coleridge's 
note  on  this  is  interesting  :  "  I  cannot  think  highly  of 
a  maxim  better  calculated  to  soothe  and  justify  a 
Socinian  in  his  Pelagian  self-redemption  than  to  direct 
a  minister  of  the  gospel  in  preaching  the  whole  truth  in 
Christ." 

Potter  is  said  to  have  had  while  archbishop  only 
four  chaplains  ;  of  these,  Chapman,  afterwards  Arch- 
deacon of  Sudbury,  and  Dr.  Tunstall,  Fellow  of  St. 
John's  College  and  public  orator  at  Cambridge,  were 
two  .2 

We  have  not  much  available  material  for  an  accurate 
picture  of  Potter  as  a  man.  No  intimate  friend,  as  with 
his  successor  Herring,  has  left  us  a  correspondence  with 
him  which  might  portray  to  us  from  his  own  words  what 
was  his  real  personal  character.  He  was  throughout 
the  friend  of  Walpole  and  of  Lord  Hervey.  He  was  a 
hard  worker  and  methodical  in  his  work  throughout 
his  life.  His  biographer.  Dr.  Anderson,  says  that  when 
he  applied  his  businesslike  habits  of  particularity  to 
the  numerous  tasks  that  fell  to  him  as  archbishop,  it 
"  gave  him  an  air  of  stiffness  and  importance  which  he 
did  not  formerly  show."  Hence  he  was  charged  with 
having  his  head  turned  by  his  exalted  position,  with 
"  assuming  great  pontifical  state,  and  submitting  to 
flattery  of  even  the  grossest  kind."    "  It  is  generally 

*  Southey's  Life  of  Wesley,  i.  190. 
'  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ii.  167. 


158 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


believed,  indeed,"  says  his  biographer,  "  that  there 
was  some  ground  for  the  charge." 

The  main  witness  against  him  on  this  head  is  the 
clever  and  learned,  but  highly  eccentric  and  certainly 
unorthodox,  Whiston,  Professor  of  Mathematics  at 
Cambridge.  In  his  memoirs  he  says  that  he  spoke 
favourably  to  Queen  Caroline  of  Potter  as  a  candidate 
for  the  Primacy  ;  that  he  had  thought  him  an  excellent 
pastor  of  a  parish,  without  an}-  marks  of  pride  or  vanity  ; 
and  proceeds:  "I  then  little  dreamed  that  this  Dr. 
Potter  b}'  going  to  Lambeth  would  take  high  and  ponti- 
fical state  upon  him ;  that  he  could  bear  the  kneeling  of 
even  bishops  before  him  when,  at  a  solemn  meeting  of 
the  members  of  the  Society  for  Propagating  the  Gospel 
in  Foreign  Parts,  he  gave  the  blessing,  which  myself 
saw  ;  that  he  would  procure  half  a  dozen  footmen 
to  walk  bareheaded  by  him  when  he  was  in  his  coach, 
three  of  a  side  besides  his  train-bearer,  at  such  his 
appearances." 

Nichols  {Literary  Anecdotes,  i.  176)  sa^-s  of  the  arch- 
bishop :  "  He  was  a  learned  and  exemplar}'  divine,  but 
of  a  character  by  no  means  amiable  ;  being  strongly 
tinctured  with  a  kind  of  haughtiness  and  severity  of 
manners." 

He  is  said  to  have  had,  beyond  the  ordinary  in- 
firmities of  old  age,  no  warning  of  his  approaching  end  ; 
but  was  seized  with  an  apoplectic  fit  and  died  at  Lam- 
beth, loth  October  1747,  in  his  seventy-third  year.  He 
was  buried  in  Croydon  Church,  where  there  is  a  monu- 
ment to  his  memory. 

Potter  died  a  rich  man.  His  biographer,  Dr. 
Anderson,  says  that  he  left  a  fortune  of  ^^90,000  ;  The 
Gentleman's  Magazine  gives  it  at  ;^70,ooo.  Anyhow, 
having  regard  to  the  then  value  of  money,  it  was  a  very 
large  sum. 

Potter  had  a  large  family,  but  only  two  sons  and 
two  daughters  survived  him.  His  eldest  son,  John, 
was  at  Christ  Church,  Oxford,  and  took  Holy  Orders.  He 


1747] 


HIS  FAMILY 


159 


was  liberally  provided  for  by  his  father,  according  to 
the  custom  of  the  day,  with  Church  preferment.  The 
Vicarage  of  Blackburne  in  Lancashire  was  his  first 
preferment,  followed  in  1739  by  the  "valuable  sine- 
cure "  of  Elme-cum-Emmett  in  the  Isle  of  Ely.  Two 
years  later  his  father  made  him  Archdeacon  of  Oxford. 
Richer  things  followed — the  Vicarage  of  Lydd  in  Kent, 
the  12th  prebend  of  Canterbury,  and  the  rich  benefice 
of  Wrotham  in  Kent,  which  he  retained  with  Lydd. 
In  connection  with  this  a  story  is  told.  The  canon 
provides  that  two  benefices  may  be  held  in  the  same 
county  provided  they  be  not  more  than  30  miles  apart. 
A  clergyman  applied  to  Archbishop  Potter  for  a  dis- 
pensation to  hold  two  livings  in  the  same  county  more 
than  40  miles  apart.  Quoth  the  archbishop,  "  They 
are  out  of  distance."  The  applicant  replied,  "  If  your 
Grace  will  look  at  the  map  of  Kent,  you  will  find  they 
are  nearer  than  Lydd  and  Wrotham."  The  applicant 
got  the  dispensation. 

But  family  life  had  its  vexations  and  disappoint- 
ments even  for  an  eighteenth-century  archbishop,  and 
John,  to  his  father's  disgust,  married  a  domestic  servant 
in  the  archiepiscopal  establishment.  So,  beyond  his 
rich  benefices,  he  got  no  more  from  his  father.  In  1766 
he  was  made  Dean  of  Canterbury,  when  he  resigned 
his  archdeaconry. 

The  archbishop's  large  fortune  went  to  his  second 
son,  Thomas,  who  went  to  the  Bar,  being  a  member  of 
the  Inner  Temple.  He  seems  to  have  inherited  his 
father's  wits,  and  perhaps  his  good  looks,  but  certainly 
not  his  good  morals.  He  was  Registrar  of  the  Province 
of  Canterbury,  and  Recorder  of  Bath.  Like  many 
successful  barristers,  he  went  into  Parliament,  and 
was  member  for  St.  Germans,  then  for  Aylesbury,  and 
afterwards  for  Okehampton.  In  1757  he  was  ap- 
pointed Joint  Vice-Treasurer  of  Ireland.  Writing  in 
1750,  when  the  Prince  of  Wales  was  supporting  the 
opposition  to  Walpole,  Horace  Walpole  says:  "The 


i6o 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


Prince  has  got  some  new  and  very  able  speakers,  par- 
ticularly a  young  Mr.  Potter,  son  of  the  last  arch- 
bishop, who  promises  very  greatly  :  the  world  is  already 
matching  him  against  Mr.  Pitt.  His  two  most  cele- 
brated speeches  were  on  the  Seaforth  election  and  on 
the  contest  between  Aylesbur3^  and  Buckingham  for 
the  summer  assizes."  He  is  said  to  have  been  intro- 
duced into  Hogarth's  cartoon  of  an  election.  He  was 
a  member  of  the  witt}^  but  profane  set  that  met  at 
Medmenham,  and  is  charged  by  Wilkes'  biographer  with 
having  poisoned  Wilkes'  morals.  He  died  in  1759 
without  apparently  fulfilling  his  early  promise.  Of 
him  Nichols,  in  his  Literary  Anecdotes,  says  that 
"  the  youngest  son,  the  favourite  Jacob  whom  he 
thought  more  worthy  of  his  estate,  was  highly  exception- 
able in  his  moral  character,  however  distinguished  by 
his  abilities,  and  in  particular  his  behaviour  both 
before  and  after  his  marriage  to  his  first  lady,  Miss 
Manningham,  whom  his  father  obliged  him  to  marry, 
is  well  known  and  remembered."  ^ 

The  archbishop's  daughters  made  clerical,  almost 
episcopal,  marriages.  One  married  Thomas  Tanner, 
D.D.,  a  son  of  Bishop  Tanner  of  St.  Asaph,  one  of  the 
most  learned  antiquaries  of  the  day.  He  was  Prebend- 
ary of  Canterbury  and  Rector  of  Hadleigh  and  Monks 
Eleigh,  Suffolk.  Another  married  Dr.  Milles,  for  whom 
his  father-in-law  got  the  United  Rectories  of  St.  Edmund 
the  King  and  St.  Nicholas  Aeon;  he  held  also  the 
Rector}-  of  Merstham,  Surrey,  and  the  sinecure  of  W. 
Tarring,  Sussex.  He  was  a  man  of  great  culture,  who 
succeeded  Bishop  Lyttelton  as  President  of  the  R.S. 
He  finally  was  made  Dean  of  Exeter,  with  which  he  held 
his  other  preferments  except  W.  Tarring. 

One  of  the  dispositions  in  Potter's  will  formed  the 
subject  of  a  litigation  which  excited  interest  in  legal 
as  well  as  ecclesiastical  circles  at  the  time,  and  is  of 
interest  now  because  we  realise  as  we  read  about  it  how 

*  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ii.  63. 


1747] 


"  OPTIONS 


i6i 


notions  of  Church  patronage  as  property  have  changed, 
and  how  such  a  Htigation  on  such  a  subject-matter  could 
hardly  proceed  nowadays.  It  related  to  the  arch- 
bishop's options.  By  ancient  ecclesiastical  law  in  this 
country  every  bishop  appointed  to  a  see,  whether  newly 
consecrated  or  translated,  had  to  give  to  the  archbishop 
of  his  province  the  next  right  to  present  to  any  ecclesi- 
astical preferment  in  the  bishop's  gift  upon  its  next 
becoming  vacant,  which  the  archbishop  chose  to  select. 
Hence  the  name  "  option."  Let  us  illustrate.  The 
Bishop  of  Chichester  had  a  piece  of  patronage  in  his 
gift,  viz.,  the  right  to  appoint  to  the  office  of  Treasurer 
of  Chichester  Cathedral.  S.  was  appointed  Bishop 
of  Chichester,  X.  being  then  Treasurer,  and  P.  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury.  The  archbishop  as  his  "  option  " 
chose  the  next  presentation  to  the  Treasurership,  and 
the  bishop  duly  conveyed  it  to  him.  Death  deter- 
mined how  the  thing  worked  out.  If  Bishop  S.  died 
first  the  option  failed,  as  it  was  held  that  the  bishop 
could  only  give  and  convey  to  the  archbishop  his  own 
right  to  fill  the  Treasurership  and  this  never  was  effec- 
tive. But  the  fact  that  Archbishop  P.  died,  leaving 
the  bishop  and  the  Treasurer,  did  not  matter.  What  the 
archbishop  got  was  property  and  passed  as  part  of  his 
personal  estate  to  his  executors  and  through  them  to 
his  legatees. 

In  1840  options  were  done  away  with,  the 
Act  carrying  into  effect  the  Fourth  Report  of  the 
Ecclesiastical  Commissioners  having  by  S.  42  prohibited 
the  conveyance  by  any  spiritual  person  of  any  right  or 
property  belonging  to  him  as  such. 

The  clause  in  Potter's  will  dealing  with  his  options 
was  as  follows  : 

I  give  and  bequeath  to  my  executors  all  my 
options  in  trust,  nevertheless  that  in  disposing  of  the 
said  options  regard  be  had  according  to  their  discretion 
to  my  eldest  son  Mr.  Potter,  Archdeacon  of  Oxford,  to 
my  sons-in-law,  the  husbands  of  my  daughters,  to  my 


l62 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


present  and  former  Chaplains,  and  other  domestics, 
particularly  to  Dr.  Tunstall  my  Chaplain,  and  to  Mr. 
Hall  my  librarian  ;  also  to  my  worthy  friends  and 
acquaintance,  particularly  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Richardson 
of  Cambridge,  who  "  (the  archiepiscopal  testator 
naively  adds)  " '  will  I  hope  in  due  time  find  some 
opportunity  to  rectify  those  mistakes  in  his  printed 
accounts  of  my  dear  and  most  honoured  patron 
Archbishop  Tenison  of  which  he  has  been  by  me 
advertized.'  " 

Dr.  Paul  and  Dr.  Chapman,  two  of  the  three 
executors  named  in  the  will,  survived  the  archbishop 
and  proved  the  will.  When  the  matter  came  into 
litigation  it  was  alleged  in  the  suit,  and  was  not — 
and  probably  could  not  be — denied  that  in  his  life- 
time the  archbishop  had  amply  provided  for  his  son 
John,  for  his  sons-in-law,  and  for  Dr.  Tunstall,  and 
had  also  "  promoted  "  Chapman — who,  as  we  have 
said,  had  been  his  chaplain — to  the  value  of  about 
;^5oo  a  year. 

After  the  archbishop's  death  three  of  his  options 
fell  in,  i.e.  the  occupiers  of  three  of  the  offices  of  which 
he  had  acquired  the  next  presentation  died  ;  of  these 
one  was  a  rectory  with  cure  of  souls.  For  this — perhaps 
because  it  had  the  semblance  of  a  duty,  a  "  cure  " — 
there  was  no  scramble  and  no  dispute  about  it.  The 
other  two  were  the  Treastirership  of  Chichester  and  the 
Precentorship  of  Lincoln.  The  Chichester  office  fell 
vacant  first.  Chapman  liked  it,  and  his  co-trustee, 
Paul,  presented  him  to  the  post.  When  challenged, 
Paul  justified  the  appointment  on  the  ground  that 
Chapman,  having  been  a  chaplain,  was  under  the  clause 
in  the  archbishop's  will  an  object  to  benefit  by  an 
option  ;  that  being  also  a  trustee,  were  Paul  to  die 
before  the  other  options  fell  in,  Chapman  as  surviving 
trustee  could  not  present  himself  and  so  might  come 
off  without  any  option-benefit,  and  said  that  he  was 
willing  as  the  other  options  fell  in  to  give  them  to  the 
son,  sons-in-law,  and  persons  named  in  the  will  other 


1747]  ANOTHER  LAWSUIT 


163 


than  Chapman,  who,  provided  he  got  the  Chichester 
Treasurership,  disclaimed  all  further  benefit. 

However,  John  the  archbishop's  son  and  his  brothers- 
in-law,  husbands  of  his  sisters,  were  not  satisfied. 
"  We  come  first  in  order  in  the  clause  in  the  arch- 
bishop's will,"  in  effect  they  said, "  and  no  one  else  ought 
to  get  anything  till  our  hunger  for  preferment  is  satiated, 
which  it  is  not."  They  went  to  the  Court  of  Chancery  : 
and  here  they  failed,  the  redoubtable  divine  Chapman 
being  confirmed  in  his  Treasurership.  The  victory  may 
have  been  a  doubtful  boon  to  him,  if  it  whetted  his 
appetite  for  more  preferment  and  more  ecclesiastical 
litigation.  Before  the  next  option  the  precentorship 
of  Lincoln  fell  in,  Paul  was  dead,  and  Chapman  sole 
trustee.  In  justice  we  have  to  look  at  what  was  done 
through  spectacles  of  the  eighteenth  century,  when 
Church  patronage  was  looked  upon  as  a  form  of 
property  of  which  every  cleric  got  and  was  entitled 
to  get  as  much  as  he  could,  within  the  four  corners 
of  the  law  ;  but  even  when  so  regarded,  Chapman's 
conduct  merits  condemnation.  In  the  first  place, 
he  thought  of  taking  the  precentorship  himself — so 
the  Lord  Keeper  found  as  a  fact  in  his  judgment ;  he 
approached  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  to  see  if  the  matter 
could  be  got  through,  with  a  proposal  thrown  in,  to  make 
it  more  presentable,  that  one  of  the  objects  mentioned 
in  the  will  should  get  one  of  the  livings  already  held  by 
Chapman  as  a  sort  of  exchange.  This  was  too  much 
for  the  bishop,  who  was  uneasy  and  asked  for  time  to 
consider  it. 

Mrs.  Potter,  the  archbishop's  wife,  had  a  nephew 
a  clergyman  named  Venner.  The  archbishop,  who  had 
been  fond  of  the  young  man,  had  helped  his  education 
and  given  him  a  living  in  Kent  of  ;^ioo  a  year  not  very 
far  from  Merstham,  one  of  Archdeacon  Chapman's 
own  livings.  Chapman  now  formed  a  plan  by  which 
through  Venner 's  co-operation  he  might  retain  for 
himself  the  coveted  Lincoln  precentorship.  Venner 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737- 


seems  to  have  been  a  persona  grata  to  the  Potter  family, 
and  even  the  pluraUst  and  archdeacon,  the  archbishop's 
eldest  son,  had  suggested  he  should  be  helped  out  of 
the  options.  So  Chapman  approached  him  ;  told  him 
he  had  long  desired  to  serve  him  ;  told  him  of  the  Lincoln 
option  by  which  Chapman  said  he  thought  Venner 
might  be  benefited.  "  You  toight  not  care  for  the 
Lincoln  precentorship  with  its  canonry  attached," 
quoth  the  covetous  archdeacon,  "  but  suppose  we 
had  a  mutual  giving  up  :  you  give  up  to  me  the 
Lincoln  offices  and  I  give  up  to  you  my  living  of 
Merstham,  which  is  commodious  to  your  present 
living."  It  would  have  been  too  much  to  expect  a 
young  cleric  in  the  year  of  grace  1 760  to  scout  a  sug- 
gestion of  the  kind  when  made  by  one  in  the  position 
of  an  archdeacon. 

The  bishop  required  Chapman  to  make  a  presentation 
to  the  vacant  office  :  so  he  executed  a  presentation  of 
Venner  thereto.  Then  the  report  quaintly  goes  on  : 
Venner  signed  a  certificate  to  the  bishop  that  Chapman 
had  offered  him  the  precentorship  but  that  he  chose  in 
lieu  thereof  and  in  the  way  of  exchange  certain  other 
preferment  more  suitable  to  him  then  in  the  possession 
of  Chapman,  and  humbly  requested  the  bishop  to 
admit  Chapman  to  the  precentorship. 

But  Naboth  was  not  long  left  in  possession  of  his 
vineyard.  A  new  actor  appeared  on  the  jcene.  Our 
readers  may  remember  as  one  of  the  persons  specially 
named  to  be  benefited  under  the  "  options  "  clause  in 
the  archbishop's  will  the  Rev.  Dr.  Richardson  of  Cam- 
bridge. He  was  Master  of  Emmanuel,  Cambridge,  and 
had  been  a  great  friend  of  the  archbishop's,  and  had, 
at  his  request  and  that  of  the  learned  Bishop  Gibson 
of  London,  undertaken  a  new  edition  of  Godwin  de 
Praesulibus.  It  seems  not  unlikely  that  among  his 
friends  were  lawyers  of  eminence  :  perhaps  Mr.  Yorke, 
afterwards  Lord  Hardwicke,  was  a  friend  and  advised 
him  that  Chapman's  position  could  be  successfully 


1747]   THE  LORD  KEEPER'S  JUDCxMENT  165 


attacked.  At  any  rate,  Richardson  filed  his  bill  in 
Chancery  to  restrain  either  Venner  or  Chapman  from 
being  inducted  or  installed.  Everyone  was  a  defendant 
— Chapman,  Venner,  the  archbishop's  son,  sons-in-law, 
chaplains,  and  the  bishop.  Richardson's  case  was  that 
he  had  altered  Tenison's  life  as  the  will  directed,  and 
that  everyone  named  in  the  clause  had  from  the  arch- 
bishop in  his  lifetime  or  since  his  death,  by  means  of 
the  options,  received  some  benefit  or  preferment  except 
him,  Richardson.  The  defendants,  of  course,  according 
to  the  old  Chancery  practice,  had  to  put  in  sworn 
answers  to  the  bill  turned  into  interrogatories  ;  and 
when  Chapman  and  Venner 's  answers  (particularly 
Chapman's)  came  to  be  settled,  their  counsel  was  in 
difficulties  how  to  meet  on  oath  the  suggestion  that  when 
Venner  was  presented  by  Chapman  to  the  precentorship 
and  canonry  there  was  a  bargain  or  promise  that  he 
should  give  it  up  to  Chapman  in  exchange.  The 
sailing  was  certainly  very  near  the  wind.  They  both 
denied  any  agreement  or  promise  for  the  exchange. 
Chapman  admitted  having  had  for  more  than  twelve 
months  the  intention  of  making  the  exchange  if  Venner 
having  got  the  offices  should  be  willing,  that  he  believed 
Venner  was  willing,  but  that  he  Chapman  was  not 
absolutely  determined  within  himself  and  therefore 
could  not  say  whether,  if  Venner  having  got  the  pre- 
centorship and  canonry  should  offer  to  exchange, 
he  Chapman  would  accept  the  offer,  and  so  would  not 
say  whether  the  intention  was  at  an  end. 

Venner  said  that  had  he  got  possession  of  the  pre- 
centorship and  canonry  he  would  have  been  willing, 
and  did  intend,  to  exchange  them  for  Merstham,  and  that 
he  was  inclined  to  believe  that  he  still  intended  to  carry 
out  the  exchange  if  Chapman  consented. 

The  case  was  heard  for  four  days  before  Lord  Keeper 
Henley,  afterwards  Lord  Northington,  a  by  no  means 
incapable  judge. 

There  were  undoubted  weaknesses  in  the  cases  of 


JOHN  POTTER 


[1737-1747 


Chapman  and  Venner.  The  judge  said  had  he  thought 
it  proved  that  there  was  a  bargain  between  them  he 
would  have  set  it  aside.  "  I  own,"  said  he,  "  there  is 
strong  foundation  of  suspicion  and  jealousy,"  but 
he  accepted  their  oath  that  there  was  no  bargain. 
There  were,  however,  difficulties  in  the  plaintiff  Richard- 
son's way.  The  executor  had  a  discretion,  and  if  he 
was  not  the  object  of  that  discretion,  where  did  his 
claim  come  in  ?  So  the  Lord  Keeper  dismissed  the  bill, 
but,  according  to  the  report,  without  costs  against  all 
the  defendants  except  the  bishop,  who  got  40s.  costs. 
But  Mr.  Yorke,  the  friend  of  Dr.  Richardson,  advised 
him  to  appeal  to  the  House  of  Lords — thinking  so  well 
of  the  case  that,  according  to  Mr.  Nichols'  Literary 
Anecdotes,  v.  158,  he  offered  to  plead  it  gratis. 

There  was  a  three-days'  hearing  in  the  House  of 
Lords,  at  the  close  of  which  the  Lord  Keeper's  decree 
was  reversed.  Chapman  was  ordered  to  present  Dr. 
Richardson  to  the  Lincoln  precentorship  and  canonry, 
and  to  pay  Dr.  Richardson's  costs  in  the  Court  of 
Chancery . 

The  case  is  reported  in  Burn's  Ecclesiastical  Law 
under  the  heading  of  "  Bishops'  options,"  and  in  2 
Brown's  Reports  of  Cases  in  Parliament. 


THOMAS  HERRING 


1 747-1 757 

In  passing  from  Potter  to  Herring  we  come,  it  appears 
fair  to  say,  to  a  somewhat  lower  level.  As  we  have 
said  so  often,  it  is  idle  to  judge  an  archbishop  of  1750 
by  the  standard  of  1900.  Potter  had  imperfections: 
he  was  stilted  and  starchy  ;  did  too  well  for  himself 
and  his  belongings  out  of  the  emoluments  of  the  Church, 
the  draper's  son  leaving  at  his  death  ;(J90,ooo,  the 
equivalent  of  ;(j200,ooo  nowadays  ;  showed  scant  sym- 
pathy with  the  efforts  of  Wesley  and  Whitfield  to  bring 
the  degraded  masses  to  the  salvation  of  Jesus  Christ, 
But  withal.  Potter  was  a  man  of  parts  and  industry  ; 
possessed  of  first-class  abilities,  he  was  from  boyhood 
a  diligent  student,  a  good  Latin  and  Greek  scholar. 
When  he  wrote  of  Church  Government  and  the  Fathers 
he  wrote  of  matters  which  he  had  studied  deeply.  His 
conviction  that  it  was  for  the  good  of  religion  in  this 
country  to  proceed  and  to  proceed  only  on  settled 
Church  lines  perhaps  saved  the  English  Church  from  in- 
novations which  a  man  like  Hoadly  might  have  thought 
improvements,  but  which  would  have  been  highly 
offensive  to  multitudes  of  Churchmen  since,  if  not 
then. 

It  is  more  difficult  to  point  out  the  conspicuous 
merits  of  Herring.  If  he  owed  his  preachership  at 
Lincoln's  Inn  and  much  of  his  subsequent  preferment 
to  Lord  Hardwicke,  as  seems  probable,  it  is  not  likely 
the  Great  Chancellor  promoted  thus  a  man  of  no  merit. 
The  writer  of  his  Life  in  the  Preface  to  his  published 
collection  of  seven  sermons  (repeated  in  the  Biographica) 
12 


i68 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


is,  in  the  style  of  biographers  at  that  day,  so  profuse 
with  his  epithets  of  flattery  that  it  is  hard  to  dissect 
out  the  real  man  and  his  real  virtues.  The  best  means 
we  have  of  getting  at  his  true  character  is  from  his 
correspondence  with  WiUiam  Buncombe.  With  this 
gentleman,  an  author  and  a  man  of  high  intelligence,^ 
the  archbishop  had  a  lifelong  friendship,  and  main- 
tained throughout  life  a  constant  correspondence,  be- 
ginning in  1728,  and  continuing  to  within  a  few  months 
of  the  archbishop's  death  in  1757. 

Thomas  Herring  was  a  son  of  the  Church,  his  father 
being  the  Rev.  John  Herring,  rector  of  Walsoken,  in 
the  county  of  Norfolk,  where  the  future  archbishop 
was  born  in  1693.  He  received  his  early  education 
at  Wisbech  School,  and  in  June  1710  was  admitted  at 
Jesus  College,  Cambridge.  Here  he  continued  till  he 
took  his  B.A.  degree,  but  in  July  1714,  seeing  no  pros- 
pect of  a  Fellowship,  he  removed  to  Bennet  College, 
of  which  he  was  chosen  a  Fellow  in  April  1716.  He 
was  ordained  deacon  in  the  same  year.^ 

For  seven  years  he  joined  Dr.  Denne,  afterwards 
Archdeacon  of  Rochester,  in  taking  pupils.  Herring 
undertaking  the  classical  coaching.  Herring  was  a 
man  to  remember  old  friends,  and  he,  when  archbishop, 
gave  preferment  to  Denne 's  son.  In  171 7  the  future 
Primate  became  M.A.,  and  in  1719  was  ordained  priest. 

He  was  successively  minister  of  Great  Shelford, 
Stow  cum  qui,  and  Trinity,  Cambridge.  In  1722,  Dr. 
Fleetwood,  then  Bishop  of  Ely,  made  him  his  chaplain, 
and  later  in  the  year  gave  him  the  livings  of  Rettingdon, 
in  Essex,  and  Barley,  near  Royston,  in  Hertfordshire. 
Herring  seems  to  have  resided  at  the  latter  place,  from 
which  several  of  the  Duncombe  letters  are  addressed. 

Bishop  Fleetwood  had  a  high  opinion  of  his  chaplain. 
Down  to  1763  the  London  residence  of  the  bishops  of 
Ely  was,  and  for  centuries  had  been,  in  Ely  Place, 

1  See  his  Life,  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  viii.  267. 
^Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  451. 


I7S7]      PREACHER  OF  LINCOLN'S  INN  169 


Holborn.  Under  an  Act  passed  in  the  third  year  of 
George  iii.,  the  house  in  Dover  Street,  which  is  now  the 
Albemarle  Club,  was  purchased  for  them.  Bishop 
Fleetwood  generally  preached  in  the  winter  season  in 
the  chapel  belonging  to  his  Palace  in  Ely  Place,  but 
he  was  now  an  old  man  in  bad  health,  and  accordingly 
employed  his  chaplain  to  occupy  his  pulpit  in  the 
episcopal  chapel.  He  declared  to  his  friends  that  he 
never  heard  a  sermon  from  his  chaplain  but  what  he 
should  be  proud  to  be  the  author  of  himself.  But 
Herring,  whether  from  the  exertions  of  influential  friends 
or  as  the  result  of  his  own  exertions  and  merits,  was  on 
the  way  to  further  honours  and  preferments.  He  seems 
to  have  maintained  touch  with  his  university,  took  his 
degree  of  B.D.  in  1724,  and  about  the  same  time  was 
presented  by  the  King  to  the  London  living  of  All 
Hallows  the  Great.  It  seems,  however,  that  he  gave 
this  up  before  institution.  In  1726,  probably  under 
the  influence  of  Sir  Philip  Yorke,  then  Attorney-General, 
afterwards  Lord  Hardwicke,  who  was  Treasurer  of  the 
Inn  in  1725,  on  the  death  of  Dr.  Lupton,  the  Honour- 
able Society  of  Lincoln's  Inn  elected  him  their  Preacher — 
a  post  which  down  to  quite  recent  days  has  frequently 
been  the  stepping-stone  to  the  highest  preferments  in 
the  Church.  This  post  Herring  retained  many  years. 
His  sermons  are  said  to  have  been  received  by  his  legal 
and  other  auditors  with  the  highest  approbation,  and 
to  have  been  marked  by  "  manly  sense,"  "  most  bene- 
volent principles,"  "  happy  elocution,"  and  "  unaffected 
deUvery."  He  is  said  to  have  avoided  the  disputes 
canvassed  among  Christians,  but  to  have  enforced  with 
clearness  and  warmth  the  fundamental  duties  of  the 
Christian  life.  On  one  occasion  only  the  preacher's 
homiletics  seem  to  have  given  offence  and  created 
clamour.  There  stood  in  those  days  not  far  from 
Lincoln's  Inn  a  theatre  known  as  The  Lincoln's  Inn 
Play-House,  and  in  the  year  1728  The  Beggar's  Opera, 
a  composition  of  the  poet  Gay,  was  being  performed 


I70  THOMAS  HERRING  [i747- 

there.  In  this  the  performances  of  a  band  of  street 
robbers  and  their  punishment  on  the  gallows  were  re- 
presented with  musical  accompaniments,  the  leader 
of  the  band,  Macheath,  being  the  hero  of  the  piece. 
There  was  complaint  about  this  time  that  night  rob- 
beries with  violence  were  especially  prevalent  in  London. 
On  the  30th  March  1728  a  letter  signed  "  Philopropos  " 
was  sent  to  the  Whitehall  Evening  Post,  one  of  the 
London  evening  papers  of  the  day,  containing  the 
following  passages  : 

"  How  shocking  then  would  it  have  appeared  to 
bring  upon  the  stage  as  a  proper  subject  for  laughter 
and  merriment  a  gang  of  highwaymen  and  pickpockets 
triumphing  in  their  successful  villainies,  and  braving 
the  ignominious  death  they  so  justly  deserved,  with 
the  undaunted  resolution  of  a  Stoic  philosopher.  The 
courage  expressed  in  the  following  lines  would  have 
become  a  Seneca  or  a  Raleigh,  but  seems  not  so  suitable 
to  the  character  of  a  criminal. 

'  The  charge  is  prepared,  the  lawyers  are  met, 
The  judges  all  ranged  (a  terrible  show), 
I  go  undisma3red,  for  death  is  a  debt, 
A  debt  on  demand,  so  take  what  I  owe.' 

"  How  far  a  late  celebrated  entertainment  may  have 
contributed  towards  those  daring  attacks,  which  are 
daily  committed  on  the  property  of  the  subjects  in  the 
streets  of  our  capital  in  defiance  of  all  law  ...  I  will 
not  pretend  to  say  ;  but  I  am  sure  nothing  can  be 
more  likely  to  ferment  these  violences  than  such  lines 
as  these  : 

'  See  the  ball  I  hold. 
Let  the  chymists  toil  like  asses, 
Our  fire  their  fire  surpasses 
And  turns  all  their  lead  to  gold.' 

"  The  detestableness  of  the  entertainment  and  its 
being  adapted  to  the  taste  of  the  vulgar  and  set  to  easy 
tunes  (which  almost  everyone  can  remember),  makes 
the  contagion  spread  wider." 

This  was  written  by  William  Buncombe,  afterwards 
Herring's  friend,  who  was  one  of  his  congregation. 


1757] 


CHAPLAIN  TO  THE  KING 


171 


Herring,  in  a  sermon  at  Lincoln's  Inn  Chapel,  also 
condemned  the  performance  as  injurious  to  public 
morals,  and  his  condemnation  was  thought  to  be 
justified  by  the  fact  that  several  thieves  and  robbers 
afterwards  confessed  in  Newgate  that  they  raised  their 
courage  at  the  playhouse  by  the  songs  of  their  hero 
Macheath  before  they  sallied  forth  on  their  desperate 
nocturnal  exploits.  Buncombe  backed  up  the  preacher's 
remonstrance  with  a  letter  in  the  London  Journal, 
signed  "  Benevolus,"  in  which  he  commended  "  the  clear 
reasoning,  good  sense,  and  manly  rhetoric,  the  judicious 
criticism,  as  well  as  the  Christian  oratory  "  of  the 
preacher.  Swift,  however,  in  the  Intelligencer,  vol.  iii., 
praised  the  play  as  "  having  done  eminent  service  both 
to  religion  and  morality,  and  said  that  it  would  probably 
do  more  good  than  a  thousand  sermons  by  so  stupid,  so 
injudicious,  and  so  prostitute  a  divine  as  Dr.  Herring." 
Of  the  approbation  thereby  given  by  Buncombe  to  the 
preacher's  condemnation  of  the  play.  Herring  in  one  of 
his  letters  speaks  as  a  favour  which  stands  distinguished 
in  his  memory  as  "  one  of  the  most  generous  and  dis- 
interested offers  of  friendship  which  ever  he  received 
from  anyone  since  he  had  been  acquainted  with  the 
world." 

Herring  himself  was  throughout  his  life  modest  as 
regards  the  merits  of  his  sermons,  and  deprecated  the 
printing  and  publication  of  sermons  generally.  In  a 
letter  written  not  many  years  before  his  death,  he  says  : 
"  I  never  printed  a  sermon  but  upon  compulsion, 
except  one  "  (his  sermon  at  York  on  the  Highland 
rebellion).  "  There  is  eno*  and  too  much  of  that  sort 
of  work.  .  .  .  Better  discourses  on  morality  cannot  be 
had  than  hundreds  which  the  world  is  in  possession  of." 

About  the  same  time  as  he  was  appointed  to  the 
preachership  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  George  i.  appointed 
him  one  of  the  King's  Chaplains  in  Ordinary.  In  the 
same  year,  while  hurrying  to  his  beloved  Osnabruck, 
George  i.  died.    The  last  years  of  his  reign  had  been 


172 


THOMAS  HERRING  [1747- 


marked  by  the  growth  of  the  power  and  influence  of 
Sir  Robert  Walpole,  the  first  Prime  Minister  of  England. 

In  ecclesiastical  affairs,  as  perhaps  in  political, 
Walpole 's  maxim  was  quieta  non  mover e.  His  own 
morals  were  lax,  and  neither  from  temperament  nor 
habits  was  he  likely  to  support  strict  or  strong  Church 
views.  He  conceived  himself  to  have  received  support 
from  the  Dissenters  in  Norfolk,  and  was  in  principle 
favourable  to  the  repeal  of  the  Test  Act  desired  by 
them,  but  contrived  to  put  them  off.  Herring  seems 
to  have  been  on  friendly  terms  with  Walpole,  and  the 
former's  churchmanship  was  of  the  type  which  would 
commend  itself  to  Walpole  for  promotion  .1 

His  friendship  wath  the  Attorney-General,  Sir  Philip 
Yorke,  continued,  and  was  confirmed  no  doubt  by  the 
great  lawj^er  frequently  if  not  regularly  in  term-time 
"  sitting  under  "  him  as  Preacher  of  Lincoln's  Inn  in 
the  Chapel  of  the  Inn.  There  is  published  in  Lord 
Hardwicke's  Life  a  letter  to  Walpole,  which  shows 
what  an  advocate  of  Herring's  claims  the  Attorney- 
General  was  : 

"Lincoln's  Inn,  Jan.  1730. 
"  Sir, — As  3^ou  have  been  soe  good  as  to  honour  my 
friend  Dr.  Herring  with  assurance  of  yr  favour,  I  cannot 
help  acquainting  you  that  the  Dean  of  Norwich  is 
supposed  to  be  in  a  dying  condition,  and  likely  to  hold 
out  but  a  little  while.  If  you  shou*^  think  this  prefer- 
ment proper  and  he  could  succeed  in  it,  the  obligation 
woud  be  very  great  ;  and  as  I  know  the  relation  it  has 
to  ye  county  in  which  you  have  so  just  an  influence, 
I  dare  answer  for  him  that  you  would  find  nobody 
more  attached  to  your  interest  and  service.  I  am 
ever  with  the  greatest  truth  and  respect.  Sir,  Your 
most  obliged  and  most  obedient  faithful  servant, 

"  P.  Yorke. 

"  Sir  R.  Walpole." 

Having  taken  his  degree  of  D.D.  in  1728,  Herring 
was,  in  1731,  presented  by  Sir  William  Clayton  to  the 

1  Cox's  Walpole,  436. 


1757] 


DEAN  OF  ROCHESTER 


173 


valuable  living  of  Bletchingley,  in  Surrey.  With  this 
change  Herring  seems  to  have  been  pleased,  and  on  the 
23rd  September  1731  he  writes  from  Bletchingley  to  his 
friend  Buncombe  : 

"  I  thank  you  most  heartily  for  y""  very  kind  con- 
gratulatn  upon  my  promotion  to  this  good  living  :  I 
am,  I  own,  pleased  with  it,  and  hope  I  may  say  I  am 
sure  I  ought  to  say  contented.  I  bless  providence 
for  so  ample  a  provision  for  me,  and  leave  it  entirely  to 
his  goodness  as  to  the  future  enjoyment  of  it,  but  tho' 
I  am  contented  myself  you,  I  find,  with  the  solicitude  of 
a  friend,  will  be  extending  yr  care  for  me  still  further 
and  prophesying  I  know  not  what  promotions." 

Whether  through  Buncombe's  intervention  or  Sir 
R.  Walpole's,  the  next  step  came  soon.  A  few  months 
later  Herring  was  made  Bean  of  Rochester,  where  he 
was  installed  5th  February  1731-32.  For  the  next  five 
years  Herring  divided  his  time  between  Bletchingley  and 
Rochester.  We  get  a  peep  of  the  inner  sentiments  of 
the  man  in  his  letters.  His  friend  and  correspondent 
Buncombe  lost  his  wife  at  the  beginning  of  1735,  and  in 
a  letter  of  condolence  to  his  friend  Herring  writes  : 

"  The  finest  sayings  of  the  finest  moralists  are  flat 
and  unaffecting  upon  these  trying  occasions.  The  only 
thing  that  can  give  the  mind  any  solid  satisfaction  is  a 
certain  complacency  and  repose  in  the  good  providence 
of  God,  under  a  sincere  conviction  that  he  orders  every- 
thing for  the  best." 

Shortly  before  this,  Herring's  friend,  Sir  Philip  Yorke, 
who  had  by  now  blossomed  into  a  peerage  and  the 
Chief  Justiceship,  got  him  to  recommend  a  tutor  for 
Philip  Yorke,  his  eldest  son.  It  seems  that  the  Judge 
made  it  a  sine  qua  non  that  the  tutor  should  be  a  good 
Whig  as  well  as  a  good  scholar. 

1737  saw  Herring's  elevation  to  the  Episcopate. 
It  may  be  well  here  for  a  moment  to  take  stock  of  the 
general  position  of  English  public  affairs  in  that  year. 


174 


THOMAS  HERRING  [1747- 


Sir  Robert  Walpole  was  still  in  power,  and  for  the 
ten  years  George  11.  had  reigned  had  been  so.  His 
ally,  the  intelligent  and  sagacious  Consort  of  George  11., 
Queen  Caroline,  was  still  alive,  it  not  being  till  the 
autumn  of  that  year  that  she  was  compelled  to  take 
to  her  bed  by  the  illness  from  which  she  died  on  20th 
November  1737.  Four  3'^ears  before  Walpole  had  been 
compelled  to  withdraw  his  Excise  Bill.  The  eloquent 
but  unprincipled  Bolingbroke  was  back  again,  having 
got  his  attainder  reversed  in  1725,  and  with  Pulteney, 
afterwards  Earl  of  Bath,  also  an  excellent  speaker, 
stirred  up  popular  feeling  by  misrepresentations  of  the 
effects  of  the  measure,  and  the  Minister  had  to  drop  it. 
But  in  spite  of  this  he  had  emerged  from  the  Elections 
of  1 734  with  nearly  as  many  supporters  in  the  House  of 
Commons  as  before. 

The  preceding  year  had  seen  the  affair  of  Porteous 
of  Edinburgh,  so  well  known  to  readers  of  Scott's  Heart 
of  Midlothian  ;  and  the  fires  of  excitement  caused  by 
the  affair  were  still  smouldering. 

As  to  foreign  affairs,  the  war  of  the  Polish  Succes- 
sion, with  Austria  and  perhaps  England  on  the  one 
side,  and  France  and  Spain  on  the  other — one  of  those 
foolish  little  wars  in  which  in  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries  Europe  was  so  easily  involved  by 
dynastic  jealousy  or  personal  ambition — -was  just  over, 
peace  having  been  signed  at  Vienna.  To  his  high 
credit,  Walpole,  always  for  peace,  had  kept  England 
out  of  the  quarrel,  but  the  feeling  in  England  against 
Spain  was  strong,  and  "  Jenkin's  ear  "  was  not  far  off. 

1737  was,  as  has  appeared  in  our  Life  of  Archbishop 
Potter,  a  busy  year  in  ecclesiastical  matters.  It  was 
the  year  in  which  death  ended  Archbishop  Wake's 
long  decrepitude. 

In  forming  an  estimate  of  Herring's  religious  and 
ecclesiastical  standpoint  our  best  material  will  be 
what  he  says  himself,  and  here  his  letters  to  Dun- 
combe  are  of  great  use  to  his  biographer.  During 


1757]  HERRING  AND  LATITUDINARIANISM  175 


all  his  life  the  Church  of  England  had  been  open  to 
attacks — some  of  which  were  attacks  not  only  on  the 
Church's  tenets,  but  on  the  whole  fabric  of  Christi- 
anity itself.  In  1 71 8,  Hoadly  (of  whom  we  have  given 
some  account  in  Potter's  life),  then  Bishop  of  Bangor, 
preached  his  sermon  on  the  Kingdom  of  Christ,  the 
general  tenor  of  which  was  that  religious  sincerity 
alone  was  to  be  the  object  of  the  Christian,  and  that 
little  or  no  importance  was  to  be  attached  to  any 
visible  Church  or  organisation  of  Christians.  It  found 
favour  at  Court,  but  provoked  great  opposition  in  Con- 
vocation and  outside,  and  Canon  Perry  says  the  publica- 
tions due  to  it  approached  two  hundred.  A  little  later 
Clarke,  the  Rector  of  St.  James's,  Piccadilly,  published 
a  Reformed  Common  Prayer  Book,  with  alterations 
made  in  it  to  favour  Arian  views,  and  in  171 8  a 
collection  of  hymns  with  the  Doxology  altered  to  an 
Arian  form. 

Between  1700  and  1750  Collins  had  attacked  the 
Prophecies,  Woolston  the  Miracles,  of  our  Lord,  and 
Tindal  wrote  advocating  Natural  Religion  in  place  of  the 
Christian  Faith.  These  were  answered  by  Churchmen 
such  as  Bishop  Chandler,  Sherlock,  and  Waterland, 
and  by  Nonconformists  such  as  Chandler  and  Lardner. 

i733>  Hoadly, the  hero  of  the  Bangorian  controversy, 
published,  but  anonymously,  A  Plain  Account  of  the 
Nature  and  End  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
In  this  work  he  took  a  low  or  Zwinglian  view  of  the 
Sacrament,  regarding  it  as  a  mere  memorial  rite  of 
no  special  value.  In  the  middle  of  the  century  Hume 
put  out  his  well-known  attack  on  Miracles,  and  in  1754 
the  religious  world  was  shocked  by  the  publication  of 
the  posthumous  works  of  Bolingbroke.  There  was 
hardly  any  part  of  the  Christian  faith  which  was  not 
attacked,  sometimes  with  ridicule,  in  these  pages. 

Herring  must  have  been,  and  we  know  that  in 
fact  he  was,  familiar  with  these  attacks  or  most  of 
them.    The  problem  how  such  attacks  are  to  be  best  met 


176 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


presents  itself  differently  to  different  minds.  There  are 
always  some  who,  deeming  certitude  to  be  the  one  in- 
dispensable factor  in  a  religion  that  is  to  be  of  use  to 
a  man,  place  a  set  of  doctrines  beyond  doubt  or  ques- 
tion, and  regard  all  who  are  not  in  total  agreement 
with  them  as  to  all  of  such  doctrines  as — to  use  the 
language  of  Sacheverell's  famous  sermon  —  "false 
brethren."  Others  with  a  less  unquestioning  faith,  yet 
with  a  deep  sense  of  the  value  of  religion,  like  to  minimise 
the  number  of  points  open  to  attack,  and  accept  as  allies, 
so  far  as  they  will  go,  those  who  champion  some  only 
of  the  dogmas  they  themselves  are  prepared  to  support. 
Herring  firmly  believed  it  was  better  to  leave  the  vital 
truths  of  Christianity  to  defend  themselves  than  to  have 
them  badly  defended.  He  has  been  called  a  Latitud- 
inarian,  even  an  Arian.  He  was  undoubtedly  not  a  High 
Churchman — less  so  distinctly  than  his  predecessor 
Potter  or  his  successor  Seeker.  To  the  Church  of  Rome 
he  had  strong  political  as  well  as  theological  repugnance. 
Horace  Walpole  calls  him  "  a  harmless,  good  man, 
inclined  to  much  moderation,  and  of  little  zeal  for  the 
tinsel  of  religion  "  ;  after  recounting  his  death,  the  same 
writer  calls  him  "  a  very  amiable  man  to  whom  no 
fault  was  imputed  tho'  the  gentleness  of  his  principles, 
his  great  merit,  was  thought  one."  Herring  himself 
professed  that  he  had  never  any  taste  for  metaphysical 
studies,  nor  indeed  did  he  make  any  profession  of 
being  a  learned  theologian.  We  have  an  instance  of 
this  in  his  attitude  towards  Bishop  Law.  Bishop 
Edmund  Law  of  Carlisle  is  an  interesting  figure  in 
ecclesiastical  histor}'  in  the  middle  and  towards  the  end 
of  the  eighteenth  century.  He  was  the  father  of  Lord 
Ellenborough,  the  Lord  Chief- Justice.  He  favoured 
"  decent  freedom  of  inquiry,"  and  was  the  friend  of  the 
celebrated  Archdeacon  Blackburne,  but  was  a  man  of 
"  great  softness  of  manner,"  and  of  the  mildest  and 
most  tranquil  disposition.  Law  took  his  Divinity  degree 
at  Cambridge  in  1749,  and  in  his  public  exercise  he 


1757] 


DR.  CLARKE 


177 


defended,  it  is  said,  what  is  usually  called  "  the  sleep  of 
the  soul,"  a  tenet  according  to  which  our  Saviour 
will  at  His  second  coming  by  an  act  of  His  power  restore 
to  life  and  consciousness  the  dead  of  the  human  species, 
who  by  their  own  nature  and  without  this  interposition 
would  remain  in  the  state  of  insensibility  to  which  the 
death  brought  upon  mankind  by  the  sin  of  Adam  had 
reduced  them.  Divines  discussed  Law's  position  on 
this  and  other  dogmas.  Archbishop  Herring,  on  hear- 
ing of  his  thesis  at  Cambridge,  said,  "I  neither  justify, 
nor  condemn  you.  If  your  doctrine  be  right,  I  am  no 
loser  ;  if  wrong,  I  am  but  as  I  was  :  I  am  in  the  hands 
of  a  just  and  merciful  God,  to  whom  I  wholly  commit 
myself.  I  believe  His  Gospels,  and  am  persuaded  you 
do  as  much  as  I,  though  we  may  have  different  senti- 
ments about  some  particulars.  We  shall  both  of  us, 
I  hope,  meet  in  Heaven." 

The  charge  of  Arianism  against  Herring  is  based 
mainly  on  the  opinions  he  expressed  on  Hoadly's 
Plain  Account  and  Clarke's  Prayer  Book.  In  a  letter, 
written  after  his  appointment  to  the  Deanery  of 
Rochester,  to  Duncombe,  dated  9th  November  1735,  he 
says  : 

"  I  see  no  reason  for  such  a  prodigious  outcry  upon 
the  Plain  Account,  etc.  I  really  think  it  a  good  book, 
and  as  to  the  Sacrament  in  particular  as  orthodox  as 
Archbishop  Tillotson  ;  his  prayers  are  very  long,  but 
in  my  poor  opinion  some  of  the  best  compositions  of 
the  sort  that  ever  I  read,  and  if  I  could  bring  my  mind 
to  that  steady  frame  of  thinking  with  regard  to  the 
Deity  that  is  prescribed  by  him,  I  believe  I  should 
be  so  far  happy  as  my  nature  is  perhaps  capable  of 
being.  There  is  something  comfortable  in  addressing 
the  Deity  as  the  Father,  not  the  Tyrant  of  the  Creation. 

Herring's  opinion  of  Clarke's  Prayer  Book  is  in  a 
letter  to  Dr.  Jortin,  which,  though  later  in  date,  we  may 
deal  with  at  this  point.  Clarke's  theology  was  open  to 
question,  but  he  was  a  man  of  high  principle.    In  1 727/ 

1  Hore,  ii.  17. 


178 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


onthedeath  of  Sir  Isaac  Newton, herefused  the  Mastership 
of  the  Mint,  worth  ;£i 200  to  £1 500  a  year,  on  the  ground 
that  a  clergyman  ought  not  to  accept  a  secular  appoint- 
ment ;  and  it  is  thought  that  he  refused  perhaps  more 
than  once  a  bishopric  offered  to  him  because  of  his 
objection  to  subscription.  Of  Clarke's  Prayer  Book 
Herring  wrote  to  Dr.  Jortin  : 

"  I  have  seen  Dr.  Clarke's  Common  Prayer  Book.^ 
I  have  read  *it,  have  approved  the  temper  and  the 
wisdom  of  it.  But  into  what  times  are  we  fallen  after 
so  much  light  and  so  much  appearance  of  moderation 
that  we  can  only  wish  for  the  success  of  Truth.  The 
world  will  not  hear  it,  and  the  proof  is  very  evident 
from  this  abominable  spirit  that  rages  against  the 
Jews.  I  expect  in  a  little  time  they  will  be  massacred. 
What  a  thin  covering  of  embers  had  kept  down  the 
fire  of  High  Church.  We  are  now  treating  the  Jews 
just  as  the  Mahometans  kept  the  Christians,  who  can 
afford  them  no  other  epithet  than  Christian  Dogs." 

Herring  was  nominated  Bishop  of  Bangor  at  the 
end  of  the  summer  of  1737.  He  was  a  persona  grata  to 
the  Prime  Minister,  Sir  Robert  Walpole,  but  there 
seems  little  doubt  that  it  was  his  friend  Lord  Hard- 
wicke,  who  was  now  Lord  Chancellor,  to  whom  he 
owed  his  promotion.  Of  the  two  letters,  the  bishop- 
elect  to  the  Chancellor  and  the  Chancellor  to  the  bishop- 
elect,  which  passed  on  the  occasion  and  which  are 
given  in  Lord  Hardwicke's  Life,  we  confess  we  like 
the  Chancellor's  the  better The  bishop  is  too  unctuous 
and  flattering,  even  cringing. 

"  I  shall  remember,"  he  sa3-s,  referring  to  the  Chan- 
cellor's favour  to  him,  "  to  my  latest  breath,  with  a 
quick  sensibility  that  the  happiness  and  honour  of 
my  life,  whatever  it  is  or  may  be,  has  been  owing  to 
the  distinction  with  which  you  have  been  pleased  to 
treat  me  and  to  the  assistance  by  which  you  have 
raised  me." 

•  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  in.  465. 

*  Life  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  i.  405. 


1757] 


CONSECRATION 


179 


Later  he  says  that  he  only  wishes  "  to  act  in  such 
a  manner  as  may  become  the  station  I  am  going  to^  be 
placed  in,  and  to  do  as  little  discredit  as  may  be  to 
your  Lordship's  recommendation  of  me." 

The  Chancellor  is  perplexed,  as  humbler  persons 
have  been  since,  how  to  address  a  bishop-elect,  and 
begins  : 

"  Dear  Sir,  or  by  what  other  name  must  I  call 
you."  He  goes  on  later  :  "  I  will  be  vain  enough  to 
avow  that  I  feel  a  real  comfort  in  my  own  breast  in 
having  cast  in  my  mite  towards  giving  to  the  Church 
a  worthy  and  able  pastor  who  will  religiously  and 
vigorously  defend  the  cause  of  revealed  religion  without 
injuring  that  of  natural  ;  and  not  by  giving  up  or 
depreciating  the  latter  lay  a  sandy  foundation  for  the 
former." 

The  Bishopric  of  Bangor  was  a  small  one,  usually 
only  held  as  a  stepping-stone  to  something  more  promi- 
nent and  lucrative. 

Herring  was  a  man  who  appreciated  quiet  and  seems 
to  have  had  misgivings  as  to  the  advantages  of  his  new 
dignity.  He  writes  from  Bletchingley,  the  living  he 
had  retained  with  his  deanery,  to  Buncombe  : 

"  You  are  extremely  kind  in  your  congratulations 
upon  the  King's  favour  to  me.  .  .  .  To  say  the  plain 
truth,  I  am  in  no  sort  of  raptures  about  it,  nay  indeed  not 
without  apprehensions  that  I  am  making  work  for  re- 
pentance. ...  I  have  thought  much  of  the  affair  and 
can  form  to  myself  no  new  felicities  it  can  bring  me, 
unless  it  be  the  opportunities  it  may  possibly  be 
attended  with  of  living  more  among  such  friends  as 
you  are  and  some  time  or  other  doing  them  some  good." 

He  was  confirmed  at  Bow  Church,  14th  January 
1738,  and  consecrated  at  Lambeth  the  day  following. 

There  are  but  scanty  materials  available  for  giving 
any  picture  of  Herring  as  a  diocesan  bishop.  He 
accepted  the  standards  of  episcopal  activity  generall}' 
adhered  to  in  his  day.    If  he  did  little  to  raise  them 


i8o 


THOMAS  HERRING  [1747- 


there  is  no  reason  to  think  that  he  fell  far  below  them. 
Unlike  Hoadly,  who  preceded  him  at  Bangor  but 
never  entered  his  diocese  as  bishop,  and  that  very  able 
man  Bishop  Richard  Watson,  who,  after  being  a  very 
high  Wrangler,  was  Bishop  of  Llandaff  for  thirty-four 
years  and  fixed  his  home  in  Westmorland,  Herring  was 
at  some  pains  to  visit  his  diocese.  In  the  autumn  of 
1738  he  took  a  trip  in  North  Wales.  He  comments  to 
his  friend  Buncombe  on  the  ruggedness  of  the  scenery, 
but  makes  no  mention  of  ecclesiastical  or  professional 
affairs. 

A  year  later,  however ,  he  makes  what  he  calls  a  "  very 
romantic  and  most  perilous  "  journey  to  his  diocese. 
He  says  :  "  It  was  the  year  of  my  primary  visitation, 
and  I  determined  to  see  every  part  of  my  diocese  :  to 
which  purpose  I  mounted  my  horse  and  rode  intrepidly 
but  slowly  thro'  N.  Wales  to  Shrewsbury."  He  set  out 
accompanied  by  his  chancellor,  his  chaplain,  secretary, 
two  or  three  friends,  and  his  servants.  He  is  satisfied 
with  one  of  the  inns  at  which  he  stayed,  and  says  : 
"  I  slept  well,  tho*  by  the  number  of  beds  in  the  room 
I  could  have  fancied  myself  in  a  hospital.  The  next 
morning  I  confirmed  at  the  church,  and  after  dinner 
set  out  for  the  metropolis  of  the  country  called  Dolgelley  ; 
there  I  stayed  and  did  business  the  next  day." 

In  July  1 74 1  he  seems  to  have  made  another  tour 
through  his  diocese,  and  wrote  to  his  friend  the  Chan- 
cellor, giving  an  account  of  the  sickness  and  death  then 
prevalent  throughout  the  kingdom. 

His  asthmatic  tendency  made  him  live,  when 
attending  Parliament,  at  Kensington,  and  Nichols 
preserves  a  letter  from  Kensington  in  the  following 
year  to  the  Vicar  of  Ruthyn  : 

"  Kensington,  29/A  April  1742. 
"  I  intend  if  it  please  God  to  visit  the  diocese  this 
summer,  and  beg  the  favour  of  you  to  give  me  a  sermon 
at  Ruthyn  Church.    I  have  not  yet  absolutely  fixed 
the  day,  but  think  it  will  be  about  the  middle  of  June." 


1757]  ARCHBISHOP  OF  YORK  i8i 


In  his  patronage  he  seems  to  have  been  careful  even 
in  his  Welsh  diocese.  His  predecessor  at  Bangor  in 
1734  was  Sherlock,  afterwards  Bishop  of  London.  He 
had  wanted  to  "  prefer  "  a  curate  in  his  diocese  of 
whom  he  had  formed  a  good  opinion,  and  whom  after 
he  had  become  Bishop  of  Salisbury  he  recommended 
to  Herring  when  the  latter  had  gone  to  Bangor.  Herring 
writes  to  the  curate  in  February  1741  giving  him  a 
rectory  : 

"  I  am  sincerely  glad,"  he  says,  "  of  this  opportunity 
of  performing  my  intentions.  I  pray  God  send  you 
health  and  long  life  ;  that  your  family  may  feel  the 
benefit  of  your  removal  as  well  as  the  parish,  which 
I  am  confident  you  will  take  a  very  honest  and  religious 
care  of." 

At  the  end  of  the  same  year  he  writes  : 

"  I  have  heard  something  indistinctly  of  the  dis- 
tresses of  the  clergy  in  some  parishes  and  of  your 
own  ill-usage  in  particular  in  that  respect  ;  which 
I  should  be  glad  to  be  acquainted  with  with  more 
certainty  and  preciseness." 

In  April  1743,  on  the  death  of  Archbishop  Blackburn, 
Herring  was  appointed  to  York.  Horace  Walpole's  ill- 
natured  comment  is  :  "  Herring  of  Bangor,  the  youngest 
Bishop,  is  named  to  the  see  of  York.  It  looks  as  if  the 
Church  were  going  out  of  fashion,  for  two  or  three  of 
them  have  refused  this  mitre."  In  a  note  he  gives 
Wilcox  of  Rochester  and  Sherlock  of  Salisbury  as  those 
who  had  so  refused.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  again 
it  was  the  Lord  Chancellor  who  procured  his  promotion. 

On  loth  June  he  wrote  to  Lord  Hardwicke  giving 
an  account  of  his  journey  into  the  North  and  taking 
possession  of  York,  where  he  says  :  "  I  am  placed  by  the 
King's  favour  through  your  Lordship's  friendship." 
Later  he  says  in  another  letter  :  "  Your  Lordship  had 
so  great  a  share  in  placing  me  in  this  situation."  His 
description  to  Duncombe  of  his  first  visit  to  York 


l82 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


and  his  entrance  on  his  archiepiscopal  duties  are 
worth  transcribing  : 

"  I  was  above  a  fortnight  on  the  road  (from  London) 
before  I  reached  Bishopthorp  and  immediately  entered 
here  upon  a  round  of  compliments  and  entertainments 
from  which  I  retreated  after  ten  days  by  changing  the 
scene  and  fulfilling  my  second  plan  of  visitat".  After 
a  short  recess  I  entered  upon  a  third,  and  at  a  proper 
distance  of  time  upon  a  fourth,  which  ended  a  fortnight 
ago  and  completed  my  visitat".  I  bless  God  for  it  I 
have  finished  the  work  not  only  without  hurt  but  with 
great  pleasure  to  myself,  and  I  returned  home  with 
great  satisfaction  of  heart  for  having  done  my  duty 
and  acquired  a  sort  of  knowledge  of  the  diocese,  which 
can  be  had  by  nothing  but  personal  inspection  .  .  . 
what  may  give  you  by  the  rules  of  proportion  a  great 
idea  of  the  importance  of  this  district  of  England,  I 
am  confident  I  have  confirmed  above  30,000  people." 

Herring's  letters  show  him  to  have  maintained  a 
keen  interest  in  public  affairs.  We  have  described 
in  the  Life  of  Archbishop  Potter  how  England  was 
involved  under  Carteret  in  1742  in  the  war  of  the 
Austrian  Succession,  how  George  11.  got  his  victory  at 
Dettingen  in  1743,  and  how  in  1745  England  had  not 
only  on  her  shoulders  the  war  against  France,  but  had 
her  hands  full  at  home  with  the  Rebellion  under  the 
Pretender,  Charles  Edward. 

On  the  23rd  September  1744,  Thos.  Ebor  writes  to 
the  Duke  of  Newcastle  from  Bishop  Thorpe  : 

"  I  fear  you  will  find  a  session  of  some  trouble  from 
the  untoward  conduct  of  this  Northern  Prince,  but  I  am 
pleased  to  find  it  the  general  sense  of  the  King's  friends 
in  this  great  county  that  His  Majesty's  and  the  Public 
affairs  can't  be  in  better  hands  than  Pelham  and  the 
Duke  of  Newcastle,  an  opinion  that  I  am  extremely 
zealous  to  cultivate."  ^ 

On  the  25th  July  1745,  Charles  Edward  landed  with 
the  "  seven  men  of  Moidart  "  in  Scotland. 

*  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32703,  f.  319. 


1757] 


REBELLION  OF  1745 


It  was  a  crisis  in  Herring's  life,  and  only  those  who 
have  read  with  care  the  correspondence  which  passed 
from  the  summer  of  1745  to  the  following  spring  between 
the  archbishop  and  the  Lord  Chancellor  can  realise — (i) 
how  gravely  the  throne  of  George  11.  was  threatened 
by  the  rebellion  ;  (2)  what  a  leading  part  Herring  took 
in  fighting  against  it.  The  English  public,  though 
slowly  reconciled  to  the  Hanoverian  Succession,  perhaps 
had  a  sneaking  affection  for  Jacobitism  and  were  very 
apathetic.  Herring,  who  was  every  inch  a  Whig  and 
anti-Jacobite,  is  said  to  have  been  the  first  man  who 
gave  the  alarm,  the  rebels'  friends  having  concealed 
their  movements  so  artfully  that  the  news  of  Prestonpans 
was  the  first  intimation  to  many  Englishmen  that  the 
Highlanders  were  in  arms. 

Frequent  and  important  communications  passed 
between  the  Archbishop  of  York  and  his  friend  the  Lord 
Chancellor  on  public  affairs.  Indeed,  on  Lord  Hardwicke 
a  very  large  part  of  the  active  duties  of  government 
devolved.  George  11.  was — as  he  generally  was  when 
he  ought  to  have  been  in  England — at  Hanover,  and  all 
his  care  and  interests  were  there.  To  please  him,  and  in 
defence  of  Hanover,  a  large  body  of  troops,  who  should 
have  been  available  for  the  British  Government  and 
who  had  they  been  in  England  would  have  crushed 
the  rebellion  at  the  beginning,  were  tied  up  on  the  Con- 
tinent until  Lord  Hardwicke  and  his  colleagues  Henry 
Pelham  and  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  made  George  11.  send 
for  them.  The  Chancellor  writes  on  31st  August  to 
his  archiepiscopal  friend,  and  says  in  his  letter  :  "  Arch- 
bishops of  York  have  before  now  drawn  the  secular  as 
well  as  the  spiritual  sword,  and  I  hope  your  Grace  will 
stand  between  us  and  danger  "  ;  and  his  P.S.  is  :  "  Is 
it  not  time  for  the  pulpits  to  sound  the  trumpets 
against  Popery  and  the  Pretender?  " 

On  the  12th  September  the  Chancellor  again  writes 
to  the  archbishop  incidentally  complaining  of  how  his 
long  vacation  was  being  spoilt,  but  showing  grave  anxiety 
13 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


as  to  the  indifference  of  the  public  to  the  rebellion  and 
fears  as  to  the  competence  of  Sir  John  Cope,  the  English 
Commander.  The  Chancellor's  fears  on  the  last  head 
were  well  founded.  Nine  days  later,  on  21st  September, 
Cope  was  utterly  defeated  at  Prestonpans.  The  news 
of  the  defeat  soon  reached  York,  and  the  archbishop 
writes  to  Lord  Hardwicke  :  "I  own  I  conceive  terrible 
apprehensions  from  the  affair  at  Prestonpans,"  and, 
after  describing  the  formidable  character  of  the  rebels' 
attack  and  failing  to  find  a  fit  adjective  for  the  English 
General's  behaviour  ("  I  won't  give  it  the  right 
name,"  he  says),  he  goes  on  :  "I  hope  in  God  all  this 
is  known  above  much  better  than  it  is  here,  and 
that  it  is  now  seen  that  this  rebellion  is  not  to  be 
quashed  by  small  pelotons  of  an  army,  but  must 
be  attended  to  totis  viribus."  In  the  same  letter  he 
gives  the  Chancellor  an  account  of  the  archbishop's 
own  exertions. 

"  We  are  all  in  motion,"  he  says,  "  from  one  end  of 
the  county  to  the  other,  and  the  Lords  will  certainly  do 
their  duty.  The  city  is  so  much  in  earnest  that  they 
will  make  of  themselves  a  considerable  purse  and  put 
between  two  and  three  troops  into  action.  The  Lord 
Mayor  told  me  yesterday  that  the  lowest  of  the  citizens 
contributed  something." 

An  association  was  formed  at  York,  and  a  subscrip- 
tion proposed  for  money  to  raise  troops  for  the  defence 
of  the  kingdom. 

On  the  22nd  September  the  archbishop  preached  a 
rousing  sermon  in  York  Minster,  and  two  days  later  the 
neighbouring  noblemen,  gentry,  and  clergy  met  at  York 
Castle,  where  they  were  addressed  by  his  Grace  in  a 
speech  of  which  the  following  are  some  of  the  leading 
passages  : 

"  I  am  desired  by  the  Lords  Lieutenant  of  the 
several  ridings  to  open  to  you  the  reason  of  our  present 
assembling.  ... 

"  It  was  some  time  before  it  was  believed  (I  would 


I7S7]  HIS  SPEECH  AT  YORK  185 

to  God  it  had  gained  credit  sooner),  but  now  every  child 
knows  it,  that  the  Pretender's  son  is  in  Scotland,  has 
set  up  his  standard  there,  has  gathered  and  disciplined 
an  army  of  great  force,  receives  daily  increase  of  numbers, 
is  in  possession  of  the  capital  city,  has  defeated  a  small  p* 
of  ye  King's  forces,  and  is  advancing  with  hasty  steps 
twds  Eng.  ... 

"  But  the  great  mischief  to  be  feared,  which  ought 
to  alarm  us  exceedingly  and  put  us  immedly  on  our 
defence,  is  ye  certain  evce  wh  opens  every  day  more 
and  more  that  these  commotns  in  ye  N.  are  but  pt  of 
a  gt  plan  concerted  for  our  ruin.  They  have  begun 
under  the  countenance  and  will  be  supported  by  ye 
forces  of  France  and  Spain,  our  old  and  inveterate  and, 
let  me  add,  our  savage  and  bloodthirsty  enemies,  a 
circe  that  shd  fire  the  blood  of  every  honest  Englishman. 
If  these  designs  shd  succeed  and  Popery  and  arbitrary 
power  come  in  upon  us  under  the  influence  and  diron 
of  these  2  tyrannical  and  corrupted  Cts,  I  leave  you  to 
reflect  what  wd  become  of  everything  that  is  valuable 
to  us.  We  are  now  blessed  under  the  mild  admon  of  a 
just  and  Protestant  King  who  is  of  so  strict  an  adherence 
to  the  laws  of  our  country  that  not  a  single  instance  can 
be  pointed  out  during  his  whole  reign  wherein  he  hath 
made  ye  least  attempt  upon  ye  liberty  or  ppty  or 
religion  of  a  single  pson.  But  if  the  ambition  and 
pride  of  France  and  Spain  is  to  dictate  to  us,  we 
must  submit  to  have  a  man  to  govern  us  under  their 
hated  and  accursed  influence  who  brings  his  relign 
from  Rome  and  the  rules  and  maxims  of  his  govt 
from  Madrid. 

"  As  to  you,  my  rev.  brethren,  I  have  not  long  had 
ye  honour  to  preside  among  you,  but  from  the  experience 
I  have  had,  and  what  I  have  always  heard  of  yr  honest 
love  for  yr  country  (if  you  permit  me  to  say  so),  I  will 
be  yr  secy  to  the  public  that  you  will  decline  no  pains 
to  instruct  and  animate  yr  people,  nor  expense  accdg 
to  your  circumstances  to  stand  up  agst  Popery  and 
arbitrary  power  under  a  French  or  Spanish  Govt. 

"  Let  us  unite  then,  Gentn,  as  one  man  to  stop  this 
dangerous  mischief."  ^ 

The  speech  had  the  desired  effect,  and  £40,000  was 
immediately  subscribed  for  the  purpose. 

*  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32703,  f,  319. 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


Herring's  activity  earned  approval  in  high  quarters. 
Horace  Walpole  writes  : 

"  Dr.  Herring,  the  Archbishop  of  York,  has  set  an 
example  that  wd  rouse  the  most  indiflferent.  In  two  days 
after  the  news  arrived  at  York  of  Cope's  defeat  "  (Cope 
was  the  English  general  at  Prestonpans),  "  and  when 
they  every  moment  expected  the  victorious  rebels  at  the 
gates,  the  Bishop  "  (he  means  the  Archbishop)  "  made 
a  speech  to  the  assembled  Company  that  had  as  much 
true  spirit,  honesty,  and  bravery  in  it  as  ever  was  penned 
by  an  historian  for  an  ancient  hero." 

George  11.  seems  to  have  expressed  himself  as  very 
pleased  with  what  the  archbishop  had  done.  In  a 
letter  to  him  from  the  Chancellor,  dated  the  28th 
September  1745,  the  latter  tells  Herring  how  he  had 
made  it  his  especial  business  to  bring  Herring's  martial 
activities  to  his  Sovereign's  notice.  This  is  how  the 
conversation  ran  : 

"  Lord  Hardwicke  :^  Your  Majesty  will  give  me  leave 
to  acquaint  my  Lord  Archbishop  that  you  approve  his 
zeal  and  activity  in  your  service  ? 

"  The  King  :  My  Lord,  that  is  not  enough  ;  you  must 
also  tell  the  archbishop  that  I  heartily  thank  him 
for  it." 

But  the  position  remained  gravely  serious  all  through 
the  autumn.  Troops  sadly  wanted  in  England  were 
still  in  Flanders,  and  it  took  time  and  trouble  to  fetch 
them  and  dispatch  them  to  Scotland.  Charles  Edward 
held  Court  at  Holyrood,  and  was  threatening  Carlisle 
and  the  towns  in  the  north  of  England.  Meanwhile, 
Herring  was  a  right  hand  to  the  Government  at  York, 
prepared  to  house  and  feed  generals,  and  even  giving 
them  wise  counsel  as  to  their  manoeuvres.  On  the 
6th  October  he  writes  to  Lord  Hardwicke  a  long  letter 
of  news,  in  which  he  says  : 

"  I  purposed  to  have  set  out  for  London  on  Wednes- 
day next,  but  I  have  had  a  sort  of  remembrance  from 
1  Life  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  ii.  1 70. 


1757] 


A  MILITANT  CLERGY 


187 


the  city  here  that  it  will  create  some  uneasiness.  There 
is  a  great  matter  in  opinion,  and  if  my  attendance  at 
Bishop  Thorpe  serves  to  support  a  spirit,  or  to  preserve 
a  union,  or  that  the  people  think  so,  I  will  not  stir, 
I  have  therefore  put  off  my  journey  but  order  my 
affairs  so  that  at  the  least  intimation  from  your  Lp. 
can  vasa  conclamare  and  set  out  in  an  hour.  To  talk 
in  the  style  military  (tho'  my  red  coat  is  not  made  yet), 
the  first  column  of  my  family  went  off  a  week  ago,  the 
second  moves  on  Wednesday,  the  third  attends  my 
motions." 

In  the  Chancellor's  repty,  dated  seven  days  later, 
he  says  : 

"  I  think  your  Grace  has  determined  quite  right  in 
staying  for  the  present  at  Bishop  Thorpe,  and  every- 
body here  thinks  so  too. 

"  I  find  your  Grace  has  learned  the  style  military, 
and  presume  tho'  the  paragraph  about  your  red  coat 
was  not  true  yet  you  are  by  this  time  skilled  in  the 
exercises  and  can  give  the  word  of  command." 

Towards  the  end  of  October  York  itself  was  threat- 
ened by  the  Pretender's  advance  southwards.  The 
archbishop's  spirits  rose  as  danger  got  nearer,  and 
there  is  an  amusing  letter  from  him  to  the  Chancellor 
written  at  this  time  in  which  he  says  : 

"  I  find  I  must  get  into  regimentals  in  my  own 
defence  in  a  double  sense  ;  for  an  engraver  has  already 
given  me  a  Saracen's  head  surrounded  with  a  chevalier 
in  chains  and  all  ye  instruments  of  war  and  the 
hydras  of  Rebellion  at  my  feet  ;  and  I  see  another 
copper  plate  is  promised  where  I  am  to  be  exhibited  in 
the  same  martial  attitude  with  all  my  clergy  with  me. 
But  by  my  troth  as  I  judge  fro'  applications  made  to  me 
every  day,  I  believe  I  cd  raise  a  regiment  of  my  own 
order  ;  and  I  had  a  serious  offer  ye  other  day  from  a 
Welch  curate  fro'  the  bottom  of  Merionethshire  who  is 
6  foot  and  |  high,  that  hearing  I  had  put  on  scarlet  he 
was  ready  to  attend  me  at  an  hour's  warning  if  ye 
Bishop  of  Bangor  did  not  call  upon  him  for  ye  same 
service . 


i88 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


"  Well,  my  Lord,  I  hope  in  God  we  shall  one  day- 
laugh  at  these  things  in  full  leisure." 

A  contemporary  letter  from  Thomas  Bentham — a 
Yorkshire  clergyman  belonging  to  a  clerical  family 
well  known  in  the  North,  and  whose  brother  was 
printer  to  the  University  of  Cambridge — gives  us  a  good 
picture  of  Herring's  activities  at  this  juncture.  It  is 
dated  6th  November  1745  : 

"  Our  Archbishop  has  indeed  bestirred  himself  on 
occasion  of  the  present  state  of  affairs  with  a  zeal 
becoming  a  Protestant  Bishop,  which  has  drawn  upon 
him  the  resentment  of  the  Pretender,  from  whom  he 
has  received  two  Letters,  one  with  orders  to  disperse 
his  Declaration  contained  therein  among  his  clergy,  etc. ; 
the  other  commanding  him  not  to  attend  the  Parlia- 
ment of  the  Elector  of  Hanover  (for  so  the  King  is 
styled),  but  to  stay  and  promote  his  interest  in  his 
Diocese — this  you  may  depend  upon  as  fact.  He  does 
indeed  stay  here  himself  (though  his  family  is  gone  to 
town  awhile  longer),  but  that  I  am  told  is  by  order  of 
the  King  and  Council  to  promote  His  Majesty's  interest 
in  these  parts.  .  .  .  The  King's  army,  I  mean  the  Foot, 
marched  through  this  place  about  a  fortnight  ago  in 
number  about  9000,  say  some ;  but  I  hardly  think 
there  were  above  7000  English,  Dutch,  and  Swiss  .  .  . 
they  encamped  that  night  on  Clifford  Moor,  whither 
we  followed  to  see  the  encampment.  ...  I  never  before 
knew  how  to  pity  these  poor  people  under  the  fatigue 
of  long  and  dirty  marches  and  (what  must  often  happen) 
hard  fare  by  day  and  a  cold  lodging  and  little  sleep 
by  night.  ...  I  trust  the  same  good  Providence  which 
visibly  interposed  on  our  behalf  by  preventing  the 
Rebels  from  marching  Southward  immediately  after 
the  defeat  of  our  forces,  when  there  was  nothing  to 
oppose  their  march  and  the  whole  country  was  in  the 
utmost  consternation,  every  day  expecting  the  enemy 
at  their  doors,  will  be  still  our  defender,  and  give  us 
the  victory  over  all  the  disturbers  of  our  peace." ^ 

All  through  November  things  continued  to  look 
threatening.    Many  of  the  soldiers  in  the  English  force 

1  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ix.  397. 


1 757]  CARLISLE  FALLEN  189 

could  not  be  trusted,  and  Herring  in  his  letters  com- 
plains of  their  Dutch  allies  and  wishes  they  were  quit 
of  them. 

There  were  dissensions  in  Parliament,  and  on  loth 
November  the  archbishop  writes  : 

"  The  great  consolation  I  reed  at  this  fearful  junc- 
ture arose  from  the  prospect  of  our  hearty  unanimity, 
which  certainly  if  kept  up  to  its  first  appearance  would 
have  done  ye  work  without  bloodshed  ;  but  that 
prospect  is  over,  and  long  before  this  our  enemies  are 
convinced  from  London  that  there  are  still  people  now 
that  are  either  so  weak  or  so  designing  as  to  help  their 
cause  much  better  than  their  faithful  ally  fro'  France 
can  do."  ^ 

Carlisle  surrendered  to  the  rebels  ;  and  on  the 
22nd  November  the  archbishop  writes  to  Lord 
Hardwicke  : 

"  It  is  not  to  be  conceived  how  frightfully  ye  hurry 
was  in  ye  city  of  York  on  Wednesday  while  ye  appre- 
hension was  strong  that  they  (the  rebels)  wd  take  this 
road.  They  are  a  little  quieted  to-day  by  the  hopes 
that  they  are  turned  towards  Lancashire.  If  the  next 
express  differs  from  this,  and  they  come  this  way,  not  a 
soul  will  stay  in  York  that  can  move  from  it. 

"  Had  I  my  royal  Master's  ear  I  slid  think  it  the  duty 
of  an  honest  man  and  good  subject  to  tell  him  that  his 
crown  was  in  danger  of  being  shaken. 

"  I  stand  ready  to  escape  at  half  an  hour's  warning, 
and  shall  endeavour  to  do  so." 

Early  in  December  the  archbishop  had  a  visit  from 
the  English  commander.  General  Oglethorpe,  who  com- 
plained bitterly  of  his  Dutch  allies. 

On  the  1 8th  December  there  was  a  general  fast,  and 
a  grand  service  in  Westminster  Abbey  attended  by  the 
House  of  Lords. 

London    was    frightened.    Hogarth's  celebrated 

1  Life  0/  Lord  Hardwicke,  ii.  185. 


I90  THOMAS  HERRING  [i747- 


picture  of  the  "March  to  Finchley"  commemorates 
the  Guards  being  sent  to  defend  London  on  the  north 
side. 

A  change,  however,  was  now  at  hand.  The  Pretender 
got  as  far  as  Derby,  and  there  a  council  of  his  leading 
men  was  held.  They  had  to  face  the  fact  that  the 
country,  if  it  had  not  risen  in  fury  against  them,  had 
certainly  not  risen  in  their  favour.  If  they  continued 
southwards  they  must  fight  a  battle  in  which  their 
success  was  doubtful.  The  Highland  chiefs  and  their 
followers  were  unhappy  in  central  England.  So,  much 
against  Charles  Edward's  will,  retreat  was  resolved  on, 
which  began  on  5th  December,  and  when  begun  was  of 
a  very  rapid  character.  The  Duke  of  Cumberland 
advanced  into  Scotland  with  8000  men,  and  on  i6th 
April  1746  defeated  the  Highlanders  at  Culloden. 

The  Rebellion,  and  with  it  the  last  hopes  of  the 
Young  Pretender,  were  extinguished  for  ever.  On  the 
Duke  of  Cumberland's  return  to  York  on  23rd  July  1746 
the  archbishop,  at  the  head  of  the  dean,  chapter,  and 
cathedral  clergy,  presented  an  address  to  the  victorious 
prince  in  the  following  terms  : 

"  Permit  me.  Sir,  in  the  name  of  my  brethren  the 
clerg}^  of  this  diocese  and  province  (the  King's  ever- 
faithful  subjects),  to  testify  to  Your  Highness  their 
exceeding  joy  at  your  happy  and  victorious  return 
from  the  North. 

"  I  want  words  to  express  the  fulness  of  our  grate- 
ful hearts  on  this  occasion,  and  therefore  I  shall  not 
attempt  it. 

"  Your  conduct.  Royal  Sir,  has  been  glorious  ;  and 
though  the  things  you  have  done  for  the  nation  are 
singularly  great,  5^our  manner  of  performing  them 
is  still  more  to  be  admired.  You  have  restored  the 
public  tranquillity  at  a  very  critical  season,  and  done  it. 
Sir,  as  became  your  high  character,  in  everv  amiable 
light. 

"  Courage  is  almost  natural  to  a  young  Prince,  and 
is  inherent  in  your  royal  blood  ;  activity  and  industry 
are  often  constitutional  ;   but  to  plan  a  great  design 


I7S7]        "  BUTCHER  "  CUMBERLAND  191 

maturely,  at  a  perilous  juncture,  to  execute  it  with 
all  the  coolness  and  caution  and  providence  of  an 
old  general,  actuated  with  the  fire  and  exertion  of 
a  young  one  ;  to  use,  moderation  and  modesty  in 
success,  and  in  the  midst  of  victory  (where  obdurate 
perfidy  did  not  call  for  exemplary  punishment)  to  treat 
unnatural  and  unprovoked  rebels  to  the  best  govern- 
ment in  the  world  as  deluded  subjects  ;  these  things, 
Sir,  which  truth  obliges  me  to  say  (though  unpolitely 
in  the  hearing  of  your  Royal  Highness),  show  the 
greatness  of  your  understanding  and  the  goodness  of 
your  heart,  which  make  every  subject  of  Great  Britain 
not  only  to  admire  and  love  and  serve  you  as  their 
royal  master,  and  the  brother  of  their  beloved  Prince, 
but  trust  and  depend  upon  you,  as  the  happy  instru- 
ment of  Heaven,  to  save  and  protect  and  raise  the 
honour  of  the  nation. 

"  Go  on  as  you  have  begun,  Great  Sir,  in  the  paths 
of  virtue  and  glory  :  and  may  the  good  providence  of 
God  always  go  along  with  you,  direct  all  your  councils, 
cover  your  head  in  the  day  of  battle,  and,  as  you  fight 
the  cause  of  truth  and  liberty,  give  uninterrupted  success 
to  all  3'^our  undertakings." 

Cumberland  was  a  skilled,  though  not  by  any  means 
a  first-class,  general.  When  it  is  remembered  that  he 
spent  the  time  from  April  to  July  in  crushing  with 
merciless  severity  the  luckless  Highlanders  who  had 
been  his  opponents;  that, as  Mr.  Gardiner  says,"  wounded 
were  dragged  from  their  places  and  shot,  and  a  build- 
ing in  which  twenty  disabled  Highlanders  had  sought 
refuge  was  burnt  to  the  ground  with  the  wretched 
fugitives  inside  it  "  ^ ;  and  that  Cumberland  by  his  con- 
duct after  his  victory  gained  the  name  of  "  the  Butcher," 
we  may  think  that  the  archbishop's  language  was  too 
strong.  But  he  felt  no  qualms,  and  in  a  letter  to 
Buncombe  says  : 

I  little  thought  I  shd  have  been  the  subject  of 
so  much  observation  at  this  juncture,  my  meaning 
being  only  to  discharge  my  duty  in  my  proper  sphere 

*  Students'  History  of  Englatrd,  p.  743. 


192 


THOMAS  HERRING  [i747- 


and  station  ;  but  be  the  event  what  it  will,  I  hope  I  shall 
have  the  grace  never  to  repent  of  doing  my  best  service 
to  my  country." 

All  through  1746  the  punishment  of  the  rebels 
occupied  the  attention  of  English  Ministers.  The 
Earls  of  Kilmarnock  and  Cromarty  and  Lord  Balmerino 
were  tried  and  condemned  in  Westminster  Hall  on 
28th  July.  Herring  had  been  near  the  scene  of  danger, 
and  seems  to  have  approved  of  strong  measures  for 
the  complete  extinguishment  of  the  rebellion.  In  a 
letter  to  Lord  Chancellor  Hardwicke,  written  as  late  as 
the  i6th  September  1746,  he  says  : 

"  I  pray  God  grant  the  King  and  his  friends  pene- 
tration and  opportunity  to  get  to  ye  bottom  of  the 
evil  and  inspire  into  them  safe  and  just  means  to 
prevent  the  return  of  it.  Here  are  great  and  general 
apprehensions  expressed,  and  strongly  too  in  this 
county,  that  the  King's  mercy  may  give  spirit  to  his 
enemies  and  dishearten  his  true  friends." 

Before  Herring's  next  step  there  had  been  a  change 
of  Ministers.  The  Duke  of  Newcastle  and  his  brother 
had  pressed  the  King  to  bring  William  Pitt,  afterwards 
Lord  Chatham,  into  office  ;  the  King  refused,  whereupon 
the  Ministers  resigned.  George  11.  asked  Carteret,  now 
Lord  Granville,  whom  the  King  fancied  to  be  favourable 
to  his  Hanoverian  predilections,  to  form  a  ministry, 
but  he  could  not,  and  after  forty-eight  hours  the  Pelhams 
were  back  again  with  Pitt. 

From  whatever  cause,  Herring  was  on  the  side  of  the 
Pelhams,  and  on  the  loth  March  1746  he  writes  from 
Bishop  Thorpe  to  Buncombe,  who  had  congratulated 
him  upon  the  failure  of  Lord  Granville  and  the  return 
of  the  Pelhams  : 

"  Your  congratulation  upon  a  late  turn  of  affairs 
was  perfectly  agreeable  to  me  and  to  the  general  senti- 
ment of  this  country.  There  is  no  bad  consequence 
that  was  not  to  be  dreaded  had  the  resignations  " 
(of  the  Pelhams  and  their  friends)  "  been  accepted." 


1757]    HERRING  PROPOSED  AS  PRIMATE  193 


The  summer  of  1747  saw  a  General  Election.  Pel- 
ham  and  Newcastle  were  to  be  continued  in  office  even 
though  what  Mr.  Gardiner  calls  "  unblushing  corrup- 
tion "  kept  them  there.  Herring,  whose  efforts  had 
made  him  influential  in  the  North,  had  no  doubts  whom 
to  support,  and  on  15th  June  1747  writes  to  Newcastle  : 
"As  to  our  Yorkshire  election  I  have  as  yet  heard  of 
no  conference  about  it  among  the  Lords.  ...  I  own  I  am 
for  a  peaceful  scheme  in  a  county  where  the  great 
people  were  so  lately  and  so  usefully  unanimous."  ^ 

On  the  loth  October  1747,  Archbishop  Potter  died 
suddenly .2  His  see  was  offered  to  Gibson,  Bishop  of 
London,  but  he  was  too  old  and  infirm  to  accept  it. 
It  was  then  offered  to  Bishop  Sherlock,  then  Bishop  of 
Salisbury,  who  had  been  Bishop  of  Bangor,  an  able 
prelate,  who  declined  it  on  the  plea  of  bad  health, 
though  he  afterwards  recovered  sufficiently  to  move 
to  London  on  the  death  of  Gibson  in  1748.  Meanwhile 
Lord  Chancellor  Hardwicke,  who  was  on  the  best  of 
terms  with  the  Pelhams,  had  very  definite  ideas  of  his 
friend  Herring's  promotion,  and  on  the  13th  October 
wrote  to  him  of  His  Majesty's  intention  to  move  him 
to  Canterbury. 

The  correspondence  which  passed  on  the  subject, 
all  preserved  among  the  Hardwicke  MSS,  is  interesting, 
but  one  fact  stands  out  clearly,  viz.  that  Herring  not 
only  did  not  seek,  but  was  sincerely  averse  to  the  Primacy. 

On  the  17th  October  he  writes  to  the  Chancellor  a 
letter  which,  though  too  full  of  adjectives  and  super- 
latives, makes  what  we  have  said  plain  : 

"  I  have  considered  the  King  my  best  friend  and 
my  most  honoured  lord  with  all  the  coolness  and 
deliberation  and  compass  of  thought  that  I  am  master 
of  ;  and  am  come  to  a  very  firm  and  most  resolved 
determination  not  to  <quit  the  see  of  York  on  any  account 
or  on  any  consideration  ;  and  I  beg  it  of  your  lordship 

•  Newcastle  Corn,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32 711,  f.  369. 

*  Parliamentary  History,  ix.  1167. 


194 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


as  ye  most  material  piece  of  friendship  yet  to  be  exerted 
by  you  to  prevent  the  offer  of  Canterbury  if  possible, 
or  to  support  me  in  the  refusal  if  the  other  cannot  be 
prevented. 

•  •••••• 

"  I  am  really  poor.  I  am  not  ambitious  of  being 
rich,  but  have  too  much  pride  with,  I  hope,  a  small 
mixture  of  honesty  to  bear  being  in  debt  ;  I  am  now 
out  of  it  and  in  possession  of  a  clear  independency  of 
that  sort.  I  must  not  go  back  and  begin  the  world 
again  at  fifty-five. 

"  The  honour  of  Canterbury  is  a  thing  of  glare  and 
splendour,  and  ye  hopes  of  it  a  proper  incentive  to 
schoolboys  to  industry  ;  but  I  have  considered  all  its 
inward  parts  and  examined  all  its  duties  ;  and  if  I 
should  quit  my  present  station  to  take  it,  will  not  answer 
for  it  that  in  less  than  a  twelvemonth  I  did  not  sink 
and  die  with  regret  and  envy  at  the  man  who  should 
succeed  me  here,  and  quit  the  place  in  my  possession 
as  I  ought  to  do  to  one  wiser  and  better  than  myself." 

The  following  are  the  crucial  parts  of  the  next  two 
letters  in  the  correspondence  :  ^ 

"  Powis  House,  20th  October  1747. 
"  My  dear  Lord, — -I  never  received  a  letter  from 
your  Grace  which  gave  any  real  concern  till  yesterday, 
and  in  truth  the  anxiety  that  has  created  in  me  is  not 
easy  to  be  described." 

After  describing  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury's  refusal, 
Lord  Hardwicke  continues  : 

"  To  this  refusal  his  lordship  has  adhered  in  another 
letter  by  yesterday's  post.  On  Sunday  noon  before 
this  last  letter  the  King  acquainted  me  with  his  resolu- 
tion that  you  shd  go  to  Lambeth,  for  which  I  thanked 
him  as  became  me  ;  not  in  the  least  suspecting  (as  I 
am  sure  I  had  no  reason  for  it)  that  you  would  decline 
it  ;  and  yesterday  noon  His  Majesty  declared  his 
pleasure  in  form  to  ye  Duke  of  Newcastle  to  ye  same 
effect.  In  this  state  ye  affair  stood  at  ye  time  I  received 
your  two  letters,  which  your  Grace  will  have  the  good- 

*  Life  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  ii.  347. 


1757] 


FORCED  TO  ACCEPT 


195 


ness  to  forgive  me  in  saying  did  to  the  last  degree 
surprise  and  grieve  me." 

On  the  Chancellor  hinting  a  doubt  to  the  Duke  of 
Newcastle  and  Pelham  whether  Herring  would  accept, 
they  both  said  it  was  "  impossible  that  a  bishop  in  the 
vigour  of  his  age,  not  quite  fifty-five,  of  such  a  char- 
acter, so  much  obliged  to  the  King  and  so  well  esteemed 
and  beloved  in  ye  world,  should  decline  it."  They 
asserted  "  that  it  would  have  the  worst  appearance  and 
create  ye  worst  impression — make  people  doubt  of  the 
stability  of  His  Majesty's  Government,  give  a  new 
triumph  to  the  Jacobites,  as  if  nobody  of  merit  wd 
venture  to  accept  the  highest  and  most  important 
dignity  in  the  Church." 

The  Chancellor  adds  : 

"  For  God's  sake,  for  ye  sake  of  ye  King,  ye  country, 
and  yr  friends,  don't  decline.  .  .  . 

"  You  are  called  by  ye  voice  of  ye  King  and  of  ye 
best  intentioned  men,  and  in  this  limited  sense  vox 
populi  est  vox  Dei." 

The  archbishop  writes  : 

"  My  good  Lord, — If  you  had  been  a  witness  of  my 
agonies  when  the  express  came  and  could  have  seen  me 
tossing  in  my  bed  afterwards  in  quest  of  what  the  great 
ones  often  want,  you  would  have  pitied  me  and  repented 
of  this  last  instance  of  yr  excellent  friendship.  But 
about  an  hour  agoe  I  took  my  resolution,  and  as  I  have 
no  reason  to  repent  of  two  removes  yr  Lp  gave  me  I 
will  hope  ye  best  of  ye  third,  and  am  now  stepping  to  ye 
fire  to  burn  three  letters  of  refusal. 

•  •  •  •  •  •  • 

"  And  now,  my  lord,  after  having  said  so  much,  and 
with  a  little  spirit,  give  me  leave  to  say  that  if  his  Majesty 
could  be  prevailed  on  to  alter  his  arrangement  by  keeping 
me,  and  letting  Hutton  take  ye  chair  pontifical,  I  will 
still  leap  for  joy  and  send  you  ten  thousand  thanks." 

Enclosed  in  the  above  letter  was  a  copy  of  the  arch- 
bishop's to  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  accepting  the 
Primacy. 


196 


THOMAS  HERRING  [i747- 


Herring  was  installed  accordingly.  He  duly  received 
the  congratulations  of  his  old  college  on  his  promotion, 
and  his  reply  is  preserved  in  Nichols'  Illustrations  of 
Literature  : 

"  Kensington,  T^rd  December  1747. 
"  Dear  Master,— Your  Fellows  have  been  with  me 
to-day,  and  delivered  me  a  most  obliging  compliment, 
which  has  been  rendered  the  more  acceptable  and,  I 
will  say,  honourable  to  me  by  being  penned  by  yourself. 
The  fine  things  you  say  of  me,  I  put  to  the  score  of  your 
friendship  ;  but  will  lay  them  up  safely  as  an  honour- 
able testimon}^  of  your  regard  to  me  ;  and  will  now 
and  then  peruse  as  a  polite  instruction  of  one  that 
means  me  well.  The  virtue  of  constancy  which  you 
are  pleased  to  mention,  I  will  most  certainly  practice 
in  one  instance,  which  is  my  friendship  for  you  ;  for 
I  long  for  nothing  more  than  to  show,  by  some  real 
service  to  you,  that  I  am,  dear  Sir, — Your  most  assured 
friend, 

"  Thos.  Cantuar."  1 

Two  letters  are  extant  written  shortly  after  Herring's 
promotion  to  the  Primacy.  The  first  is  in  reply  to  the 
celebrated  Whiston,  Professor  of  Mathematics  at  Cam- 
bridge, who  had  written  complaining  of"  the  mean  com- 
position of  the  Forms  of  Prayer  for  the  days  of  Fasting 
put  out  in  Archbishop  Potter's  time,  and  begging  that  in 
the  next  Form  for  the  Fast,  17th  February,  some  serious 
Collect  might  be  inserted  on  the  occasion  of  the  long  and 
sore  murrain  among  the  horned  cattle."  Whiston  also 
asked  for  a  copy,  if  at  Lambeth,  of  the  Thanksgiving  and 
Prayer  on  occasion  of  the  Great  Storm,  27th  November 
1703,  "  an  excellent  pattern  for  future  forms."  In  his 
reply  the  new  Primate  says  : 

"  I  will  do  the  best  I  can  in  this  stat°  to  which 
indeed  I  have  been  forced.  And  as  neither  pride  nor 
ambition  nor  covetousness  tempted  me  to  desire  it,  so 
it  is  my  daily  prayer  to  God  that  in  the  use  and  exercise 
of  this  great  office  I  may  keep  my  heart  and  my  hands 

*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  454. 


I 


1757]     AN  EMINENT  NONCONFORMIST  197 

free  from  those  sad  temptations.  I  think  it  happy  that 
I  am  called  up  to  this  high  station  at  a  time  when  spite 
and  rancour  and  narrowness  of  spirit  are  out  of  counten- 
ance ;  when  we  breathe  the  benign  and  comfortable  air 
of  Hberty  and  toleration  ;  and  the  teachers  of  our 
common  religion  make  it  their  business  to  extend  its 
essential  influence  and  join  in  supporting  its  true 
interest  and  honour.  No  times  ever  called  more  loudly 
upon  Protestants  for  zeal  and  security  and  charity." 

The  second  letter  to  which  we  wish  here  to  refer, 
and  which  was  written  about  this  time,  was  addressed 
to  an  eminent  Nonconformist  divine,  Dr.  George  Benson. 
Benson  had  lived  for  some  time  in  the  family  of  Dr. 
Calamy,  and  then  ministered  first  at  Abingdon  and 
afterwards  in  London.  Benson  was  a  student ,1  and 
an  author  as  well  as  a  preacher,  and  Aberdeen  Univer- 
sity made  him  D.D.  in  1744.  Glasgow  contemplated 
a  similar  conferring  of  honour,  but  a  rumour  of  theo- 
logical unsoundness  stopped  the  project.  In  1747  he 
published  a  volume  of  sermons  on  various  subjects. 
He  presented  the  new  archbishop  with  a  copy  of  these, 
and  congratulations  on  his  elevation.  Herring's  reply 
is  dated  the  2nd  February  1748.    In  it  he  says  : 

"  Reverend  Sir, — I  cannot  satisfy  myself  with 
having  sent  a  cold  and  common  answer  of  thanks  for 
ye  volume  of  most  excellent  and  useful  sermons.  I  do  it 
in  this  manner  with  great  esteem  and  cordiality.  I  thank 
you  at  the  same  time  as  becomes  me  to  do  for  your 
very  obliging  good  wishes.  The  subject  on  which  my 
friends  congratulate  me  is  in  truth  matter  of  constant 
anxiety  to  me.  I  hope  I  have  an  honest  intention  and 
for  the  rest  I  must  rely  on  the  good  grace  of  God  and 
the  counsel  and  assistance  of  my  friends." 

The  editor  of  Dr.  Benson's  Memoirs  publishes  Her- 
ring's letter  in  the  Preface  to  Benson's  Life  of  Christ, 
and  praises  it  as  breathing  "  that  Christian  charity  which, 
did  it  prevail  generally  in  the  governors  of  the  Christian 
Church,  would  produce  most  extensive  good  effects 

^  Wilson's  Dissenting  Churches,  i.  114. 


198  THOMAS  HERRING  [1747- 

in  regard  to  the  present  as  well  as  the  past  happiness 
of  mankind."  There  is  also  a  letter  from  Herring  to  the 
Rev.  Thomas  Pyle,  who  was  chaplain  to  the  celebrated 
Bishop  Hoadly  and  a  man  of  note  among  Churchmen 
in  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century/  and  this  dis- 
closes further  how  Herring  regarded  his  elevation.  In 
it,  writing  from  Kensington  under  date  17th  December 
1747,  he  says  : 

"  Your  kind  wishes  for  me  give  me  spirit  and  make 
my  heart  glad  ;  for,  in  good  faith,  I  have  been  teased 
and  terrified  with  this  exaltation  ;  and  thus  much  I  will 
venture  to  say  for  myself,  it  shan't  make  me  proud, 
it  shan't  make  me  covetous,  it  shan't  make  me  ungrate- 
ful or  unmindful  of  my  friends  :  but  it  frights  me 
and  I  fear  has  robbed  me  of  the  most  precious  thing  in 
life,  which  is  Liberty  :  but  I  will  assert  as  much  of  it 
as  I  can,  and  not  be  for  ever  bound  to  the  trammels 
of  a  long  tail  and  ceremony,  which  my  soul  abhors," 

In  September  1748  the  important  See  of  London 
became  vacant  by  the  death  of  Gibson. 

Newcastle  was  attending  George  11.  in  Hanover  ; 
and  Herring,  who  fully  felt  his  newly  acquired  responsi- 
bilities as  Primate  and  wanted  a  Bishop  of  London  on 
whose  help  and  support  he  could  rely,  writes  to  him  from 
Kensington,  under  date  the  12th  September  1748.  After 
reporting  the  Bishop  of  London's  death,  he  intimates  that 
it  is  of  the  highest  importance  to  introduce  a  man  upon 
the  Bench  of  most  distinguished  character.  "  I  have 
before  me,"  he  goes  on,  "  very  particular,  and  I  think 
I  may  call  it  alarming,  evidence  that  some  business 
on  the  scheme  of  Reformation  of  our  Establishment 
in  its  Doctrines,  Discipline,  and  Liturgy  is  now  on  foot 
and  ready  for  publication,  and  it  will  require  the  assist- 
ance of  men  of  the  best  characters  and  tempers  on  the 
Bench  of  Bishops  to  conduct  the  affairs  of  the  Church 
in  such  delicate  circumstances.  The  scheme  is  now 
in  the  Lord  Chancellor's  hands  ...  it  appears  to  be 
very  serious  ,  .  .  and  is  proposed  as  the  united  sense  of 
^_        *  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ix.  438. 


1757]    PROMOTION  OF  BISHOP  BUTLER  199 


some  of  the  best  of  the  clergy  or  laity  in  the  kingdom, 
and  is  found  in  the  shape  of  a  Petition  to  both  Houses  of 
Convocation."  ^ 

The  archbishop  modestly  expresses  his  wish  "  to 
procure  to  himself  such  assistance  in  the  discharge  of 
that  high  office  as  may  enable  him  in  the  approaching 
times  of  trial  to  do  his  duty.  What  is  intended  was 
known,  he  says,  "  to  the  late  Bishop  of  London,  who 
appriz'd  me  of  very  busy  times  approaching." 

Newcastle's  reply  and  its  enclosure  give  us  a  picture 
of  how  a  place  of  such  importance  as  the  Bishopric  of 
London  was  filled  in  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  and  the  parts  which  the  King,  the  Minister,  and 
the  Primate  respectively  had  in  the  business. 

The  movement  referred  to  in  Herring's  letter  appears 
to  be  the  agitation  started  by  Jones  of  Alconbury  and 
supported  by  Francis  Blackburne,  which,  according  to 
Mr.  Hore,  "  advocated  a  trenchant  review  with  altera- 
tions in  the  Church  services  and  Ritual."-  It  was 
in  1749  that  Jones,  a  man  of  real  piety,  published  his 
Free  and  Candid  Disquisitions  relating  to  the  Church  of 
England. 

As  to  the  vacancy  in  the  See  of  London  one  thing 
seems  clear,  that  George  11. — and  it  is  much  to  his  credit 
— wanted  to  give  it  to  the  great  Bishop  Butler.  Queen 
Caroline  almost  on  her  death-bed  had  asked  her  husband 
to  see  to  Butler's  advancement,  and  had  also  recom- 
mended him  to  Archbishop  Potter,  and  the  year  after 
his  wife's  death  the  King  had  made  Butler  Bishop  of 
Bristol.  Bristol  was  a  poor  bishopric,  worth  about  £700 
3.  year,  and  was  nearly  always  held  with  a  deanery, 
St.  Paul's,  or  Christ  Church.  Butler  was  made  Dean  of 
St.  Paul's  in  May  1740.  Now  George  11.,  faithful  to 
his  wife's  wish,  meant  Butler  to  be  advanced — to 
London  he  would  prefer — if  not  to  Durham  ;  for 
Durham  was  likely  to  be  vacant  soon,  Dr.  Edward 

•  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32716,  f.  213. 
^  Hore's  Ch.  of  Eng.,  from  Will.  III.  to  Victoria,  ii.  22. 

14 


200 


THOMAS  HERRING  [i747- 


Chandler,  the  Bishop  of  Durham,  lying  ill  in  London  of 
the  illness  of  which  he  died  on  the  20th  July  1750. 
But  Newcastle  wanted  Sherlock  for  London.  Sherlock, 
who  had  succeeded  Hoadly  at  Bangor  in  1728  and  at 
Salisbury  in  1734,  was  a  leading  Churchman,  had  been 
Master  of  the  Temple,  and  had  written  against  Hoadly, 
and  more  actively  as  a  Christian  apologist  against 
Collins  and  Woolston.  He  had  declined  the  Primacy 
on  the  score  of  health.  Newcastle  respected  his  ability 
and  piety  ;  perhaps  he  was  also  anxious  to  clinch 
him  as  a  supporter  of  the  Government.  For  Sherlock 
had  been  a  waverer  ;  his  father  had  been  a  nonjuror, 
and  when  he  recanted  got  the  Deanery  of  St.  Paul's. 
The  son  hesitated  about  supporting  the  Hanoverian 
Succession,  so  that  the  rhymster  of  the  day  wrote : 

"  As  Sherlock  the  elder  with  his  jure  divine 
Did  not  comply  till  the  Battle  of  Boyne, 
So  Sherlock  the  younger  still  made  it  a  question 
Which  side  he  should  take  till  the  Battle  of  Preston." 

He  seems  in  spite  of  his  piety  to  have  been  of  a 
rather  quarrelsome  temper.  He  had  a  difference  with 
Herring  about  "  an  option,"  which  almost  prevented 
their  speaking  to  one  another  soon  after  his  removal  to 
London,  and  as  to  which  Herring  says  to  Newcastle, 
"  I  will  support  my  right  with  half  my  income,"  but  as 
to  which  fortunately  he  can  report  two  months  later 
that  he  can  "  see  some  hopes  of  accommodation  in  the 
affair  of  the  option."  ^ 

To  return  to  the  appointment  of  a  Bishop  of  London, 
Newcastle  writes  to  his  brother,  Pelham,  from  Hanover, 
and  after  mentioning  the  vacancy  arising  by  Gibson's 
death,  says  :  "  The  King  designs  it  for  Butler,  but  as  I 
have  a  notion  Sherlock  ma}'  like  it,  I  have  got  leave  to 
offer  it  to  him.  If  Sherlock  accepts  London,  Llandaff 
will  have  Salisbury  of  course,  and  Durham  be  open  for 
Butler."  2 

1  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32718,  ft.  47,  80. 
*  Ubi  supra,  32716,  f.  278. 


1757]  PHILIP  DODDRIDGE 


20 1 


He  encloses  the  proposals  he  had  made  to  the  King, 
at  the  head  of  which  is  Dr.  Butler,  Bishop  of  Bristol,  to 
be  Bishop  of  London,  and  then  follow  proposals  con- 
sequent on  the  first  change,  including  one  that  Hayter, 
who  was  afterwards  Bishop  of  London,  and  who  was  a 
Yorkshireman  of  position  and  influence,  should  succeed 
Butler  at  Bristol  and  St.  Paul's.  Almost  on  the  same 
day  he  writes  to  Herring  "  to  know  Your  Grace's 
thoughts  on  these  proposals,"  ^  and  Herring  writes  back, 
on  the  29th  September  1748,  approving  Dr.  Hayter 
"  to  succeed  the  Bishop  of  Bristol  in  both  his  Prefer- 
ments." Courtierlike  he  says  he  is  glad  now  to  retract 
as  "  needless  and  impertinent  to  your  Grace  "  the  exhor- 
tations he  had  given  in  his  letter  of  the  12th  September. 

Contrary  to  expectation,  Sherlock  accepted  London, 
so  there  was  no  immediate  move  for  Butler  ;  but 
George  11.  remained  firm  that  he  should  have  Durham, 
for  in  June  1750  Newcastle  writes  to  the  archbishop: 
"  The  Bishop  of  Durham  is  dying.  The  translation  of 
the  Bishop  of  Bristol  to  Durham  is  already  determined 
by  the  King."  2 

In  October  1748  Archbishop  Herring  received  a 
valuable  addition  to  the  Library  at  Lambeth.  Teni- 
son  had  bequeathed  all  his  MSS,  not  before  deposited 
at  Lambeth,  to  Gibson  and  Dr.  Ibbot,  his  librarian. 
Gibson  was  the  survivor,  and  under  the  directions  in 
his  will  his  collection, ^  including  what  was  the  chief 
part  of  it,  that  of  Archbishop  Tenison,  filling  fourteen 
folio  volumes,  was  delivered  to  Herring  and  placed 
in  the  Library  at  Lambeth.  It  was  indexed  and 
bound  by  Archbishop  Seeker's  orders. 

With  Dr.  Philip  Doddridge,  author  of  the  well- 
known  hymns,  "  My  God  and  is  Thy  table  spread," 
'■  Ye  servants  of  the  Lord,"  "  Hark  the  glad  sound 
the  Saviour  comes,"  Herring  had  some  friendly  corre- 
spondence.   Doddridge  was  one  of  the  most  eminent 

'  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32716,  f.  281. 

*  Ubi  supra,  32721,  f.  53.  ^  jsjichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  v.  289. 


202 


THOMAS  HERRING  b747- 


Nonconformist  divines  of  tiie  middle  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  and  until  the  autumn  of  1751  was  minister  of 
the  congregation  at  Northampton.  He  fell  a  victim 
to  consumption,  and  at  the  end  of  that  year  went 
abroad,  but  soon  died.  There  is  an  interesting  account 
of  an  interview  which  Doddridge  had  with  Herring, 
contained  in  a  letter  of  Doddridge  to  his  wife,  dated 
the  4th  August  1748.    He  says  : 

"  I  sat  a  full  hour  with  him,  i.e.  the  archbishop, 
alone,  and  had  as  free  a  conversation  as  I  could 
have  desired.  It  turned  .  .  .  especially  on  the  affair 
of  a  comprehension,  concerning,  I  very  evidently  per- 
ceive, that  tho'  his  Grace  has  most  candid  sentiments 
of  his  Dissenting  Brethren,  yet  he  has  no  great  zeal 
for  attempting  anything  in  order  to  introduce  them 
into  the  Church,  wisely  foreseeing  the  difficulties  with 
which  it  might  be  attended  ;  but  when  I  mentioned 
to  him  (in  the  freedom  of  our  discourse)  a  sort  of  medium 
between  the  present  state  and  that  of  a  perfect  coalition, 
which  was  that  of  acknowledging  our  clergy  as  unschis- 
matic  by  permitting  their  clergy  to  officiate  among  us 
if  desired,  which  he  must  see  had  a  counterpart  of  per- 
mitting Dissenting  Ministers  occasionally  to  officiate 
in  churches,  it  struck  him  much  as  a  new  and  important 
thought,  and  he  told  me  more  than  once  that  I  had 
suggested  what  he  should  lay  up  in  his  mind  for  further 
consideration."  ^ 

Herring  writes  to  him  from  Lambeth  under  date 
the  2 1  St  July  1749  : 

"  Reverend  Sir, — I  have  been  since  I  received 
your  letter  in  a  very  disagreeable  situation  moving 
my  family  to  Lambeth.  I  have  a  very  true  regard 
and  honour  for  you  ;  and  shall  be  most  sincerely  glad 
to  see  you  whenever  your  affairs  bring  you  to  London. 
.  .  .  I  am  always  at  home,  and  the  sooner  my  friends 
call  upon  me  in  the  morning,  so  much  the  better.  I 
am  at  leisure  constantly  by  nine.  ...  I  cannot  go  to 
settle  at  Croydon  this  summer  for  reasons  very  appar- 
ent to  a  man  that  knows  anything  of  cleaning  and  fur- 

'  Doddridge's  Correspondence,  v.  75. 


1757] 


WHIGS  AT  OXFORD 


203 


nishing  houses  called  Palaces. — I  am,  with  most  sincere 
esteem,  Reverend  Sir,  Your  obliged  and  assured  friend, 

"  Tho.  Cantuar." 

A  letter  to  the  same  divine,  written  in  June  1751, 
says  : 

"  I  am  always  glad  to  see  you.  I  shall  be  at  home 
on  Saturday  morning,  and  remember  I  am  an  early 
man." 

It  is  not  generally  known  that  during  a  long  period 
a  tortoise  had  been  an  occupant  of  the  garden  at 
Lambeth.  The  first  archbishop  that  introduced  one 
was  Laud,  and  it  lived  till  about  1749.  Herring  in- 
stalled a  successor,  and  wrote  to  the  Lord  Chancellor  : 

"  It  is  a  very  trifling  thing  to  tell  y'  Ldship  that  I  have 
put  a  tortoise  in  my  garden  here.  Not  that  I  purpose  to 
live  against  him,  but  to  keep  up  to  the  full  ye  number  of 
old  domesticks.  I  hope  he  will  like  my  coleworts  as 
well  as  those  of  St.  Kits,  his  native  country.  His  house 
is  a  curious  dome  and  painted  by  the  best  hand  in  the 
universe.  I  have  no  forebodings  from  the  circumstance 
that  the  first  Archbp  that  introduced  a  tortoise  here  lost 
his  head."  1 

We  refer  in  the  Life  of  Archbishop  Seeker  to  Herring's 
efforts  to  get  him  some  preferment  after  his  long  tenure 
of  the  See  of  Oxford,  but  in  one  of  his  letters  on  the 
subject,  written  in  July  1750,  he  also  recommends  the 
Dean  of  Christ  Church,  Dr.  Coneybeare,  for  a  bishopric, 
and  adds  some  remarks  which  are  interesting  as  showing 
what  a  Whig  archbishop  felt  towards  the  Tory  univer- 
sity of  Oxford.  "  It  will  be,"  he  says,  "  a  work  of 
time  to  bring  that  University  into  a  wise  way  of  thinking 
and  acting — to  pick  out  and  distinguish  those  valuable 
men  who  are  friends  to  His  Majesty  and  the  Protestant 
Succession."  ^ 

By  the  summer  of  1751  the  question  of  naturalising 
the  Jews  was  being  stirred,  though  but  faintly.  The 

*  Lije  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  ii.  401. 

*  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32721,  i.  424. 


204 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


Government  of  Pelham  and  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  on 
the  whole  favoured  it  ;   they  thought  it  would  bring 
wealth  and  wealthy  people  into  the  country,  though, 
strangely  enough,  the  Corporation  of  London  and  the 
merchants  and  traders  petitioned  against  it.^    We  have 
detailed  later  in  Archbishop  Seeker's  Life  the  disastrous 
course  the  Bill  had  ;  passed  one  session  and  repealed 
the  next  by  its  promoters  in  the  Ministry  in  an  im- 
portunate   hurry— the    bishops    supporting    both  its 
passing  and  its  repeal.    The  sentiments  of  the  clergy 
as  to  the  passing,  at   any  rate,  of  such  a  measure, 
required  attention,  and  were  the  subject  of  communica- 
tions between  the  archbishop  and  the  Secretary  of 
State.     In  a  letter  to  Newcastle,  dated  the  5th  March 
1 75 1,  Herring  says  :  "  I  have  desired  the  bishops  to  meet 
here  on  Friday  to  consider  the  Hop,  the  Quaker,  and  the 
Naturalisation  Bill  so  far  as  concerns  the  admission  of 
the  Jews."    He  suggests  that  instructions  ma}'  have  to 
go  to  the  clergy,  who  may  perhaps  be  "  factious."  He 
hopes  the  Hop  Bill  "  will  miscarry."    He  thinks  it  hard 
to  alter  the  law  "  to  the  distress  and  detriment  of  the 
Clergy,"  in  relief  of  the  Quakers  whose  "  reasonable  com- 
plaints against  the  Clerg}'  are  few  or  none,"  and  pro- 
ceeds :  "  As  to  the  admission  of  the  Jews  I  am  constitu- 
tionally prone  to  indulgences,  but  great  difficulties 
occur  to  one's  mind.    In  the  first  place  they  are  a 
peculiar  people  and  one  knows  nothing  of  their  turn  at 
home,  the  spirit  of  their  econom}-,  the  true  influential 
Principles  of  their  religion,  the  nature  of  their  con- 
nections and  private  engagements,  the  degree  of  their 
reverence  for  any  Laws  or  Government  but  of  their 
own  cast,  their  sentiments  of  Christians  and  their 
obligations  to  live  well  with  them."    He  suggests  it  a 
wise  thing  "  to  know  more   of  them   before  we  let 
them   into   privileges  "  which    once   given   can't  be 
easily  taken  away.      Other  Governments  had  been 
cautious  about  it.    Oliver  Cromwell  "  and  his  strait- 
Smollett's  History,  xii.  144. 


1757]  REPEAL  OF  JEW  NATURALISATION  205 


laced  "  divines  considered  the  matter,  but  it  went 
off.  In  America  even  Locke  had  required  a  belief 
in  the  Christian  Religion  as  essential.  If  Jews 
are  naturalised,  why  not  Mahometans  with  all  their 
apparatus  of  Mosques  and  Mollahs  ?  He  asks  the 
Minister  to  communicate  such  thoughts  to  him  as  may 
serve  for  his  direction,  and  winds  up  with  a  sentiment 
well  befitting  a  Whig  archbishop  under  a  Minister  who 
followed  Walpole's  precept,  quieta  non  movere.  "  In 
this  country  there  is  no  rest  for  the  soles  of  our  feet  but 
by  standing  upon  a  good-natur'd  establishment  with  a 
legal  Toleration  appendant."^ 

We  may  anticipate  a  little  by  showing  here,  how,  when 
the  clamour  against  the  Jew  Bill  had  risen  to  its  greatest 
height  by  the  autumn  of  1753,  Herring  showed  himself 
as  having  little  keenness  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
Act  or  its  repeal.    He  says  : 

"  One  is  ashamed  for  the  spirit  of  our  country  when 
we  consider  the  inveterate  and  widespread  prejudice 
which  attends  the  Jew  Bill,  a  Bill  innocent  at  least,  if 
not  useful  in  policy,  but  as  to  our  Religion  and 
Church  Establishment  utterly  unconnected  with  it. 
However,  faction,  working  upon  the  good  old  spirit  of 
High  Church,  has  made  wild  work  with  the  nation. 
As  the  obtaining  the  Bill  was  really  worth  no  hazard, 
so  the  repealing  it  seems  hardly  worth  a  Debate  unless 
any  danger  may  arise  from  the  Government  giving  way 
to  a  most  unreasonable  popular  clamour." ^ 

It  must  be  confessed  that  Herring's  views  as  to  the 
consecration  of  bishops  for  the  American  colonies  were 
less  sound  from  the  Churchman's  point  of  view  than 
those  of  Potter  or  Seeker.  He  writes  to  Newcastle  on 
20th  June  1750: 

"  I  say  nothing  to  Your  Grace  about  a  matter 
relating  to  American  Episcopacy  because  I  know  you 
have  had  the  history  of  it.    It  was  transacted  at  two 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32724,  f.  i6i. 
*  Ubi  supra,  32733,  f.  162. 


206 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


meetings.  I  was  accidentally  absent  from  the  first, 
from  the  second  hy  design,  not  from  resentment.  When 
the  King  commands  me  to  consider  that  affair  I  wiW 
do  so  with  my  best  judgment  and  with  a  principal 
regard  to  the  tranquillity  of  his  Government,  but  not 
before."  ^ 

But  if  unsound  on  the  American  Episcopate,  Herring 
seems  to  have  done  his  duty  as  President  of  the  S.P.G. 
He  writes  to  Newcastle  on  the  17th  September  1751  : 
"As  I  am  to  meet  the  Societ}'^  for  Propagating  the 
Gospel,  I  expect  some  enquiries  about  our  application 
to  the  King  for  a  General  Collection.  November  is  the 
latest  month  for  settling  about  this  truly  important 
business.  They  wish  to  be  assured  of  His  Majesty's 
favour  to  them  now."^  And  on  the  21st  October  1751 
he  writes  his  thanks  for  procuring  Royal  Warrants  for 
a  General  Collection.  He  asks  Newcastle  to  try  and 
procure  the  Royal  Bounty,  and  adds  :  "  There  is  necessit}^ 
for  this.  We  are  in  truth  quite  reduced  ;  a  speedy 
assistance  would  be  as  good  almost  as  the  Bount}'  itself." 

Later,  in  1754,  doubtless  at  the  archbishop's  request, 
the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  who,  by  the  death  of  his  brother, 
Henry  Pelham,  had  become  Prime  Minister,  becomes  a 
subscriber  of  20  guineas  to  the  S.P.G. ,  and  Herring 
writes  to  him  under  date  the  24th  July  1754  : 

"  I  shall  never  teaze  the  Administrate  on  the  Foot 
of  Episcopacy  in  America,  as  our  Societ}?^  was  formed 
with  great  wisdom  and  goodness,  the  execution  of  its 
design  has  been  conducted  with  integrity,  and  I  will 
hope  to  good  purpose  in  a  politicall  as  well  as  a  religious 
light.  I  have  hitherto  endeavoured  and  shall  continue 
so  to  do  to  keep  clear  of  the  rancour  of  High  Church 
and  govern  our  affairs  so  far  as  in  me  lies  b}'  the  gentle 
methods  of  Christian  moderation." 

"  High  Church  "  is  here  used  by  the  archbishop, 
we  think,  in  its  eighteenth-century  sense. 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32721,  f.  132. 

2  C/bi  supra,  32725,  S.  186,  327. 


1757]    HERRING  AND  COMPREHENSION  207 


Even  before  his  health  broke  down  in  1753,  Herring 
seems  to  have  felt  the  burdens  of  his  Primacy  heavy. 
Anthony  Ellys,  afterwards  Bishop  of  St.  David's,  was 
a  man  of  whose  wisdom  he  thought  highly.  He  writes 
to  the  Secretary  of  State,  on  the  i6th  July  1752,  re- 
commending Ellys  for  promotion,  and  says  he  desires 
the  appointment  of  some  "  friend  of  more  particular 
confidence  "  :  "  it  is  not  unreasonable,"  he  says, 
"  for  me  to  wish  for  a  sort  of  coadjutor  Bishop  ;  I  know 
how  much  I  want  one.  Two  of  my  best  Predecessors 
since  the  Revolution,  Tenison  and  Wake,  were  indulged 
in  this  sort  of  advantage,  tho'  they  less  wanted  it,  having 
got  abilities  as  well  as  integrity.  I  claim  a  title  only 
to  the  last  quality."^ 

As  regards  Herring's  attitude  to  and  treatment  of 
Church  questions,  what  may  be  called  the  Broad 
Churchmen  of  his  day  worked  especially  in  two 
directions:  (i)  comprehension  of  Dissenters,  and  (2) 
an  easier  subscription  for  the  clergy.  The  first  in- 
volved a  relaxation  of  the  formularies  of  the  Church, 
which  would  have  allowed  some  at  any  rate  of  the 
Nonconformists  to  come  within  the  pale  of  the  National 
Church.  In  this  effort  the  Broad  Churchmen  were, 
of  course,  only  carrying  on  what  had  been  afoot 
ever  since  the  Restoration.  So  far  the  High  Church- 
men had  always  been  successful  in  defeating  any 
such  relaxation.  Sheldon  outmanoeuvred  Baxter.  The 
Commission  of  William  iii.  and  Tillotson  had  been  a 
failure.  Herring  would  probably  have  favoured  such 
an  admission  of  Dissenters.  It  must  be  remembered 
that  throughout  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century 
Nonconformity  had  some  excellent  representatives 
among  its  ministers.  It  would  have  been  difficult 
to  find  men  of  greater  learning,  piety,  and  spiritual 
power  than  Doddridge  the  hymn-writer,  or  Dr.  Samuel 
Chandler  the  Presbyterian,  who  preached  for  forty  years 
at  the  Old  Jewry,  where  was,  according  to  Wilson, 

>  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32728,  f.  278. 


208 


THOMAS  HERRING  [1747- 


"  one  of  the  most  respectable  congregations  in  London." 
Poor  Chandler,  having  lost  his  wife's  fortune  in  the 
South  Sea  Bubble,  had  had  to  open  a  bookseller's  shop 
in  the  Poultry,  still  retaining  his  pastoral  duties.  But 
he  attained  great  eminence  as  a  religious  writer,  especi- 
ally in  a  work  on  Miracles  in  opposition  to  Collins  the 
Deist.  So  far  back  as  1725  he  presented  Archbishop 
Wake  with  a  copy  of  this  work.  Wake,  in  a  letter  of 
thanks,  highly  commended  the  book,  by  which  he  said 
he  had  been  not  only  "  usefully  entertained  but  edified," 
and  knowing  the  author  at  the  time  only  as  a  bookseller, 
advised  him  to  spend  his  "  time  in  writing  books 
rather  than  in  selling  them."  ^  Chandler  had  been  the 
schoolfellow  at  Gloucester  and  Tewkesbury  of  Bishop 
Butler  and  Archbishop  Seeker,  and  he  retained  through 
his  life  his  friendship  with  these  eminent  Churchmen. 
Mr.  Wilson,  in  his  work  on  the  Dissenting  Churches,  says 
that  Dr.  Chandler's  "  dignified  appearance  and  gentle- 
manlike deportment,  connected  with  his  superior  endow- 
ments of  mind,  contributed  to  give  him  great  weight 
with  the  body  of  Dissenters."  Perhaps  these  qualities, 
as  well  as  his  friendly  relations  with  men  high  in  the 
Church,  made  him  the  representative  of  Nonconformity 
in  negotiations  for  Comprehension  which  took  place  in 
1748,  and  were  favourably  regarded  by  Archbishop 
Herring.  In  the  letter  written  to  Mr.  Fy\e  on  his 
appointment  to  Canterbury,  from  which  we  have 
already  quoted,  Herring  says  of  Chandler  : 

"  I  saw  Sam  Chandler  the  other  day.  I  really 
affect  and  honour  the  man,  and  wish  with  all  my  soul 
that  the  Church  of  England  had  him  ;  for  his  spirit 
and  learning  are  certainly  of  the  first  class." 

The  story  of  the  negotiations  is  given  in  Doddridge's 
Letters  and  Wilson's  Dissenting  Churches  as  follows  : 

Chandler  being  on  a  visit  to  friends  at  Norwich 
happened  to  hear  Gooch,  then  Bishop  of  Norwich, 

*  Wilson's  Dissenting  Churches,  ii.  363. 


1757] 


A  MEETING 


charge  his  clergy  in  the  cathedral.    All  England  was 
at  the  time  agog  with  the  Pretender's  late  landing  in 
Scotland,  to  which  we  have  so  often  referred.  Gooch 
charged  the  leaders  of  the  rebellion  with  Nonconformist 
sympathies,  and  proved  it  by  pointing  to  the  condemned 
lords  in  the  Tower  being  attended  by  Presbyterian  con- 
fessors.   Chandler  politely  remonstrated  with  the  bishop 
for  this  statement.    His  remonstrance  was  very  civilly 
replied  to,  and  the  result  was  a  friendly  meeting  of  the 
bishop  and  Chandler,  when  Comprehension  was  discussed. 
Yet  another  friendly  meeting  followed,  Sherlock,  then 
Bishop  of  Salisbury,  being  also  present.    "  Our  Church, 
Mr.  Chandler,"  said  Sherlock,  "  consists  of  three  parts, 
doctrine,  discipline,  and  ceremonies;  as  to  the  last  two 
he  suggested  there  might  be  no  difficulty,  but  as  to  the 
first,  what  is  your  objection?"    Chandler  wished  the 
Articles  to  follow  more  closely  scriptural  terms,  and 
the  Athanasian  Creed  to  be  discarded.    To  neither 
requirement  were  the  bishops  insuperably  opposed,  but 
asked  what  should   they  do   about  re-ordination  of 
Nonconformist  ministers.    Chandler  affirmed  that  none 
of  his    brethren    would   renounce   his  Presbyterian 
ordination  ;  "  but,"  said  he,  "  if  yr  Lordship  mean  only  to 
impose  your  hands  upon  us  and  by  that  rite  recommend 
us  to  public  service  in  your  Society  or  Constitution, 
that  perhaps  might   be  submitted   to."^    The  two 
bishops    at    the    conclusion   of  the  visit  requested 
Chandler  to  wait  on  Archbishop  Herring,  which  he 
did,  and  met  Bishop  Gooch  there,  Wilson  says,  "  by 
accident."    The  archbishop  met  Chandler  well,  and 
being  told  by  Bishop  Gooch  what  Mr.  Chandler  and  he 
had   been   talking  about,  namely,  a  Comprehension, 
said,  "  A  very  good  thing  "  ;  he  wished  with  all  his 
heart,  and  the  rather  because  this  was  a  time  which 
called  upon  all  good  men  to  unite  against  infidelity 
and  immorality,  which  threatened  universal  ruin.  To 
Chandler's  request  to  have  the  Articles  in  Scripture 

1  Wilson,  ii.  373. 


2IO 


THOMAS  HERRING  [1747- 


words  :  "  Why  not  ?  "  said  Herring.  "  It  is  the 
impertinence  of  men  thrusting  their  own  words  into 
Articles  instead  of  the  words  of  God  which  have  occa- 
sioned much  of  the  divisions  in  the  Cliristian  Church  from 
the  beginning  to  this  day."  The  archbishop  added 
"  that  the  bench  of  bishops  seemed  to  be  of  his  mind  ; 
that  he  shd  be  glad  to  see  Mr.  Chandler  again,  but 
was  then  obliged  to  go  to  Court."  ^ 

We  have  this  account  from  Mr.  John  Barker,  an 
eminent  divine  of  the  Presbyterian  denomination  and 
the  bosom  friend  of  Doddridge  the  hymn-writer, 
who  adds  that  Chandler  incurred  the  displeasure  of  some 
of  his  Dissenting  friends  for  his  conduct  in  the  affair, 
chiefly,  it  seems,  for  having  said  that  he  asked  for  the 
Articles  to  be  expressed  in  Scripture  language  for  others, 
not  for  himself.  Herring  naturally  gets  great  praise 
from  Mr.  Wilson,  the  Nonconformist  biographer,  for 
his  conduct  in  the  affair.  The  archbishop's  "  truly 
Christian  principles  added  greater  lustre  to  his  character 
than  the  adventitious  honours  of  the  world." 

In  1752  Dr.  Birch  published  his  Life  of  Archbishop 
Tillotson  and  dedicated  it  to  ^Archbishop  Herring,  who 
writes  to  thank  Dr.  Birch  on  the  14th  November  1752  : 

"  Dear  Sir, — Though  you  have  said  a  great  deal 
too  much  of  me  I  must  thank  you  for  j^our  book  and 
Dedication  too  ;  for  I  think  myself  extremely  honoured 
by  having  my  inconsiderable  name  connected  with  that 
of  the  best  of  my  Predecessors. 

"  I  feel  the  disparitj^  of  the  characters,  and  must  sub- 
mit to  the  censure  which  will  arise  from  a  comparison 
so  infinitely  to  my  disadvantage  ;  but  as  posterity  when 
the  real  object  is  out  of  sight  may  imagine  from  your 
picture  that  there  might  be  some  distant  shadow  of  a 
resemblance,  I  think  I  ought  to  enjoy  the  contemplation. 

"  Your  Book  will  certainl}''  be  an  acceptable  present 
to  the  Publick,  and  it  is  well  judged  by  you  to  connect 
with  the  Archbishop's  life  some  account  of  his  acquaint- 
ance and  friends.  They  serve  to  illustrate  his  character, 
receive  honour  from  their  relation  to  him,  and  to  ex- 

1  Hore,  ii.  22. 


1757]        OLD  PALACE  AT  CROYDON  211 


plain  the  religious  and  civil  history  of  a  very  important 
period  of  our  time  ;  and  the  domestic  enemies  of  our 
country  (yet  subsisting  in  the  same  shape)  may  be 
ashamed  to  see  their  narrow  principles  exposed,  not  by 
reproach  or  censure,  but  a  narration  of  plain  facts. 

"  The  Master  of  Lambeth  House  has  good  hopes  that 
you  have  not  done  with  his  libraries.  Libraries  are 
collected  for  such  folk  as  you  ;  and  the  doors  of  these, 
and  indeed  every  door  in  this  house,  will  be  at  all  times 
open  to  you."  ^ 

Herring  was  by  this  time  settled  at  Croydon.  The 
old  archiepiscopal  palace  there  was  very  dear  to  Herring  ; 
and  well  it  might  be,  for  no  building  had  associations 
more  interesting  to  an  English  Churchman.  The  tie 
between  Croydon  and  the  archbishops  dated  at  least 
to  the  Conquest,  for  William  i.  is  said  to  have  given 
the  Manor  of  Croydon  to  Lanfranc.  Mr.  Pelton,  in  his 
History  of  Croydon,  says, "  that  a  house  or  palace  existed 
at  Croydon  in  1273  appears  from  a  mandate  dated  from 
there  by  Archbishop  Kilwardby,"  and  for  nearly  500 
years  after  that  the  old  palace  was  a  principal  residence 
of  the  Primates.  Katherine  of  Arragon  lived  there 
for  a  time  ;  Queen  Elizabeth  stayed  there  ;  James  i. 
of  Scotland  was  a  prisoner  there.  The  buildings  which 
can  be  seen  now  comprise  the  Guard  Chamber,  the 
Great  Hall  with  a  fine  chestnut  wood  ceiling,  the  Chapel, 
and  the  Long  Gallery.  Archbishop  Arundel  erected 
the  Guard  Chamber,  Archbishop  Stafford's  escutcheon 
is  on  the  corbels  in  the  Great  Hall — on  the  knobs  of  the 
old  benches  in  the  chapel  are  Laud  and  Juxon's  arms. 
The  river  Wandle  flowed  out  near  Croydon  old  church, 
hard  by  the  palace,  and  watered  its  extensive  gardens 
and  grounds  now  covered  by  rows  of  streets.  Herring 
at  considerable  expense  repaired  the  old  buildings  and 
laid  out  the  gardens.  He  seems  to  have  paid  especial 
attention  to  strengthening  the  Great  Hall  and  its  roof. 
On  a  beam  may  still  be  seen  "  T  1748  H  " — and  fine 
lead  pipes  outside  marked  with  his  initials  bear  witness 

'Nichols'  Illustyalions  of  Literature,  iii.  463. 


212 


THOMAS  HERRING  [1747- 


to  his  repairing  hand.  Herring's  attachment  to  the 
palace  is  testified  by  the  language  he  uses  in  a  letter 
to  Dr.  Ducarel  from  Croydon,  dated  24th  April  1 754.  "  I 
love  this  old  House,"  he  says, "  and  was  very  desirous  of 
amusing  myself,  if  I  could  find  means  to  do  it,  with  the 
history  of  its  buildings  ;  for  the  house  is  not  one,  but 
most  certainly  an  aggregate  of  buildings  of  different 
tastes  and  ages.  .  .  .  You  compliment  me  more 
than  is  due  to  me  ;  for  a  very  great  repair  was  done 
here  by  Archbishop  Wake,  who  lived  here  several 
summers  and  has  a  title  to  a  large  share  of  your  com- 
mendation." 1 

Besides  Dr.  Anthony  Ellys,  who  on  Herring's 
recommendation  was  at  the  end  of  1752  made  Bishop 
of  St.  David's,  an  intimate  friend  of  Herring  was 
Dr.  John  Jortin.  Bishop  Newton  puts  Jortin  on  a 
level  with  Warburton,  and  says  :  "  They  were  really 
two  very  extraordinary  men  .  .  .  both  men  of  great 
parts  and  abilities."  He  had  been  at  Jesus,  Cam- 
bridge, with  Herring,  and  though  their  friendship  was 
interrupted  before  Jortin  came  up  to  London,  they 
renewed  their  intimacy  when  Herring  became  Primate. 
The  archbishop  and  Bishop  Sherlock  got  him  appointed 
Boyle  Lecturer.  He  preached  the  consecration  sermon 
when  Zachary  Pearce,  Rector  of  St.  Martin-in-the-Fields, 
was  made  Bishop  of  Bangor,  and  by  Herring's  order 
published  it.  Herring  gave  him  unsolicited  the  rec- 
tory of  St.  Dunstan-in-the-East,  summoning  him,  it 
is  said,  during  a  banquet  of  the  Sons  of  the  Clergy,  and 
without  any  previous  notification  pulling  the  presenta- 
tion out  of  his  pocket.^  He  also  gave  him  in  1755 
the  degree  of  D.D.  Jortin 's  best-known  works  were 
his  Life  of  Erasmus  and  his  Ecclesiastical  History. 
Perhaps  the  preferments  Jortin  got  from  Herring 
makes  his  judgment  of  the  archbishop  not  to  be  over- 
much relied   on  ;  but  in  his  Erasmus  he  says  that 

*  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ix.  305. 

*  Ubi  supra,  ii.  561. 


1757]      POOR  FOREIGN  PROTESTANTS  213 

in  the  picture  of  Archbishop  Warham  drawn  by- 
Erasmus  he  contemplates  that  of  Herring,  his  late 
patron,  "  who,"  he  goes  on,  "  besides  the  good  qualities 
in  which  he  resembled  Warham,  had  piety  without 
superstition  and  moderation  without  manners,  an  open 
and  liberal  way  of  thinking,  and  a  constant  attach- 
ment to  the  cause  of  sober  and  rational  liberty  both 
civil  and  religious."  ^ 

England  on  many  occasions  in  the  eighteenth 
century  championed  the  cause  of  suffering  Protestants 
on  the  Continent,  and  Herring  seems  to  have  been 
fairly  active  in  this  respect. 

As  far  back  as  October  1749,  he  reminds  Newcastle  in 
a  letter  that  the  Minister  had  asked  him  when  made 
archbishop,  to  keep  up  useful  correspondence  with  the 
Protestant  Churches  abroad.  The  archbishop  says  that 
he  has  done  this  in  general,  and  recommended  the  poor 
Hungarians  for  relief.^ 

Among  the  papers  of  Lewis  Majendie,  Esq.  of 
Hedingham,  is  a  folio  volume  containing,  under  the  years 
1753  and  1754,  letters  from  Herring  to  the  squire  of 
Hedingham  of  that  day,  on  the  subject  of  an  applica- 
tion by  the  persecuted  and  oppressed  Hungarians  for 
aid,  pecuniary  and  otherwise.^ 

In  a  letter,  dated  the  22nd  September  1754,  Herring 
says  he  has  received  a  representation  of  their  case  which 
he  promises  to  consider,  and  if  necessary  to  amend  : 
he  would  ask  the  Bench  of  Bishops  to  help,  but  they  are 
all  in  the  country,  so  that  nothing  effectual  can  be  done 
for  the  Hungarians  till  winter.  In  December  1754, 
Herring  writes  again  to  Majendie  that  he  is  much  con- 
cerned about  the  poor  Hungarians.  "  The  Bench," 
he  says,  "  are  pressed  upon  these  applications  from 
abroad  and  many  others  at  home  beyond  their  abilities  "  ; 
but,  later,  Herring  sends   his  own  and  the  bishops' 

1  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ii.  567. 

*  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32719,  f.  261. 

^  See  Fifth  Report  of  Historical  MSS  Comm.,  App.  p.  322. 


214 


THOMAS  HERRING  [1747- 


subscriptions  and  approves  collections  at  Oxford  and 
Cambridge  for  the  suffering  University  at  Debritzen. 

In  the  early  summer  of  1753,  Herring,  while  at 
Lambeth,  was  seized  with  a  violent  "  pleuretic  "  fever. 
He  nearly  died.  He  seems  to  have  had  a  first  attack 
early  in  May,  for  on  the  13th  he  writes  to  Newcastle  : 
"  I  thank  God,  the  Fever  and  inflammation  are  removed." 
According  to  the  custom  of  those  times,  he  was  violently 
bled  by  his  medical  advisers,  one  of  whom  was  Dr. 
Heberden,  the  celebrated  physician  of  the  day — to  the 
extent,  it  is  said,  of  eighty  ounces  of  blood.  But  on 
rst  June  he  was  taken  very  ill  again.  Ministers  receive 
a  report  from  the  doctors  :  "  We  were  suddenly  sent 
for  this  morning  on  account  of  a  shortness  of  breath  as 
great  as  ever.  We  thought  proper  to  bleed  his  Grace 
again  7  ounces."  In  a  week  he  moves  to  Croydon, 
writing  to  Lord  Hardwicke  on  the  8th :  "I  go  this 
afternoon  to  try  the  experiment  of  the  Surrey  air.  .  .  . 
I  am  fatigued  with  drugs,  my  breath  is  extremely  short." 
His  biographers,  however,  seem  to  take  too  gloomy  a 
view  of  the  effects  of  this  illness  on  the  archbishop. 
"  He  recovered,  they  say,  in  some  measure,  yet  from 
that  time  he  might  rather  be  said  to  languish  than  to 
live.  He  retired  to  Croydon,  declined,  as  far  as  possible, 
all  public  business,  seeing  little  company  but  his  rela- 
tions and  particular  friends."^  However,  as  early  as 
the  19th  June,  one  of  Lord  Hardwicke's  sons  writes  to 
his  brother  :  "  The  Archbishop  is  a  vast  deal  better, 
and  has  even  been  on  horseback,  and  rid  on  Banstead 
Down  with  great  pleasure  and  no  inconvenience.  He 
writes  in  great  spirits  "  ;  and  a  few  days  later  the  same 
writer  to  the  same  says  :  "  The  Archbishop  grows 
better  every  day,  drinks  ass's  milk,  and  rides  on  horse- 
back, and  expresses  great  hopes  of  his  own  case.  I 
can  tell  you  nothing  that  you  will  be  better  pleased  to 
hear." 

He  certainly  maintained  his  correspondence  with 

'  Life  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  ii.  449. 


THO^rAs  Herring 
(From  the  Portrait  by  William  Hogarth) 

[To  face  />.  214 


1757] 


CONVALESCENCE 


215 


Duncombe,  and  writes  shortly  after  his  arrival  at 
Croydon  : 

"  Blessed  be  God  for  it.  I  have  mended  in  health 
since  my  arrival  here  and  continue  to  mend  gradually. 
In  so  acute  a  disorder  as  mine  was,  it  was  not  to  be 
expected  I  cd  jump  into  health  (jumping  is  too  much 
for  me),  but  I  ought  to  be  contented  and  thankful  too 
if  I  can  walk  leisurely  into  it." 

Perhaps  his  weakened  health  increased  Herring's 
dislike  to  theological  controversy.  Five  months  after 
his  last  letter,  he  writes  to  Duncombe  in  reference  to  a 
friend  of  his,  one  Dr.  Carter,  a  clergyman  of  St.  George's 
Chapel,  Deal,  who  had  been  presented  the  year  before 
by  one  of  his  chapel  wardens  at  the  instigation  of  the 
rector  for  not  reading  the  Athanasian  Creed.  The 
archbishop  refers  to  his  improved  health,  and  need 
of  "  quiet,  the  great  balm  of  life,"  and  proceeds  :  "  Your 
friend  Dr.  Carter  is  grievously  teased  by  folks  who  call 
themselves  the  '  orthodox.'  I  abhor  every  tendency 
to  the  Trinity  Controversy.  The  manner  in  which  it  is 
always  managed  is  the  disgrace  and  ruin  of  Christianity." 

The  archbishop's  health  improved  with  fluctuations 
during  the  summer  of  1 753.  He  was  a  fixture  at  Croydon, 
and  on  29th  July  invites  Newcastle  to  dine  with  him 
there  :  "  Your  Grace  shall  find  concha  salis  puri,  a  clean 
tablecloth,  good  mutton,  and  "  (here  Herring  allows 
himself  a  liberty  which  a  bishop  or  archbishop  of  to-day 
would  not  feel  was  open  to  him)  "  the  best  claret  I  can 
procure." 

By  October  he  was  well  enough  to  pay  a  visit  to  the 
Princess  Dowager  of  Wales — whose  husband  had  died 
in  March  1751 — and  to  the  King.  The  only  reference 
the  archbishop  makes  to  his  health  is  when  he  says 
how  the  widowed  princess  did  him  the  honour  to  walk 
round  the  garden  and  show  him  the  orangerie.  "  What 
added  to  the  favour  was,  she  was  pleased  to  go  my 
snail's  pace."  ^ 

»  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32732,  f.  377. 

15 


2l6 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


Still  he  remains  largely  an  invalid,  and  writes  to 
Newcastle  :  "  I  wish  I  could  say  better  things  of  myself 
than  I  can.  I  think  my  breath  has  of  late  grown 
easier,  but  have  so  frequent  indisposition  in  so  various 
shapes  that  I  believe  I  puzzle  my  doctors.  Wilmot 
advised  me  to  spend  the  winter  here,  but  in  plain  truth 
I  cannot  come  into  publick  without  being  more  ruffled 
and  hurried  than  my  present  health  will  bear." 

Certainly  there  was  an  improvement  in  the  arch- 
bishop's health  in  the  course  of  1754  ;  and  we  read 
of  a  poetical  curate  of  Croydon  named  Fawkes,  in  that 
year  publishing  "  an  ode  on  his  recovery."^  The  ode 
was  rewarded  by  a  living,  and  on  Herring's  death,  the 
poet,  in  1 763,  printed  a  "  pathetic  elegy  "  on  his  patron.^ 

On  the  6th  March  1754,  Henry  Pelham,  the  Prime 
Minister,  died.  There  was  serious  trouble  in  carrying 
on  the  Government,  and  especially  in  selecting  a  new 
First  Lord  of  the  Treasury.  Pelham 's  brother,  the 
Duke  of  Newcastle,  who  had  been  Secretary  of  State, 
was  much  his  inferior,  and  quarrelsome  into  the  bargain. 
He  did  not  like  Pitt,  who  had  been  Pelham's  colleague 
in  the  Commons.  In  fact,  the  whole  weight  of  the 
Premiership  seems  for  some  time  to  have  devolved  on 
Lord  Hardwicke,  whose  idea,  as  we  shall  see  from  the 
letter  next  quoted,  was  to  split  up  the  offices  Pelham 
had  held,  and  make  some  peer  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury, 
with  a  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  under  him  in 
the  Commons.  Who  that  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer 
was  to  be  was  a  very  difficult  question.  It  certainly 
raises  our  opinion  of  Herring's  capacity  to  find  the 
Lord  Chancellor  not  only  writing  to  him  giving  full 
information  of  the  difficult  position  of  affairs,  and 
asking  him  to  send  a  statement  of  what  he  thought 
ought  to  be  done  to  be  submitted  to  the  "  lords  of 
the  Cabinet,"  but  also  asking  for  a  separate  private 
letter  giving  the  Chancellor  the  benefit  of  his  own 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32732,  f.  613. 
"  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  iii.  52. 


1757]  HARDWICKE  CONSULTS  HERRING  217 


views  and  sentiments.  We  cannot  forget  that  the 
head  of  the  Enghsh  Church  is  a  great  State  official 
whose  views  on  poHtical  affairs  would  at  any  rate  in 
the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  have  great  weight 
with  the  Government  as  such.  But  that  a  man  of  the 
capacity  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  one  of  the  greatest  Chan- 
cellors that  ever  adorned  the  Woolsack,  should  ask  and 
seriously  rely  on  (as  he  evidently  did)  Herring's  advice 
in  a  difficult  State  situation,  makes  us  think  Herring 
must  have  been  a  man  of  bigger  and  of  stronger 
mental  calibre  than  we  should  have  thought  from 
the  record  of  his  conduct  whether  as  bishop  or  primate. 

In  his  letter  to  the  archbishop,  written  five  days 
after  Pelham's  death.  Lord  Hardwicke  says  : 

"  Powis  House,  nth  March  1754, 
Monday  8,  at  night. 
"  My  dear  Lord, — The  late  melancholy  event  has 
greatly  affected  us  all.  .  .  .  I  have  been  forced  in  the 
midst  of  a  broken  attendance  of  the  Court  of  Chancery, 
to  be  continually  running  about  to  the  King,  and  to  have 
meetings  with  the  principal  persons  inthe  administration. 

"  Your  Grace  has  heard  that  the  first  candidate  at 
Court  is  Mr.  Fox." 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  there  had  been  some  person- 
alities over  Lord  Hardwicke 's  Marriage  Act  between 
him  and  Fox,  and  they  were  not  friends,  but  Hardwicke 
assures  the  archbishop  that  he  is  going  "  to  consider 
personalities  no  further  than  to  maintain  and  save  the 
point  of  honour.  In  the  several  audiences  which  I  have 
had  of  the  King,  His  Majesty  has  declared  that  he 
has  no  favourite  for  this  succession  ;  but  he  hopes  the 
Lords  of  the  Cabinet  '  would  not  think  of  recommend- 
ing to  him  anyone  who  had  flown  in  his  face.'  "  This 
seems  to  refer  to  Pitt.    The  Chancellor  proceeds  : 

"  The  opinion,  therefore,  which  I  with  my  friends  in 
the  Cabinet  have  formed,  is  that  there  is  at  present  no 


2l8 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


person  in  the  House  of  Commons  fit  to  place  entirely 
in  Mr.  Pelham's  situation  with  safety  to  this  adminis- 
tration and  the  Whig  party.  Upon  this  they  have 
proceeded  to  think  of  advising  His  Majesty  to  place 
some  peer  at  the  head  of  the  Treasury  with  a  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  in  the  House  of  Commons  under  him. 
.  .  .  He  must  be  one  who  will  carry  on  the  election  of 
the  next  Parlt  upon  the  same  plan  on  which  Mr. 
Pelham  had  settled  it." 

After  saying  that  the  best  plans  seemed  to  be  for  the 
Duke  of  Newcastle  to  go  to  the  head  of  the  Treasury, 
he  goes  on  : 

"  The  Lords  of  the  Cabinet  are  to  meet  at  my  house 
to-morrow  evening  at  seven  o'clock.  There  is  no 
expecting  to  see  your  Grace  here  at  that  hour,  nor  do 
the  Duke  of  Newcastle  or  I  incline  that  you  shd  run 
any  risque.  But  we  both  wish  to  know  your  senti- 
ments, and  humbly  hope  that  your  Grace  will  authorise 
me  to  say  something  in  your  name." 

The  archbishop  is  then  invited  to  write  a  short  letter 
"  by  this  messenger,"  recommending  the  appointment 
of  Newcastle  as  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  with  a 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  in  the  Commons. 

"  Besides  such  an  ostensible  letter,"  the  Chancellor 
adds  towards  the  end  of  his  rather  lengthy  epistle,  "  I 
shall  be  much  obliged  for  a  separate  private  letter,  to 
convey  any  particular  sentiments  and  observations 
which  your  Grace  shall  honour  me  with.  But  that 
must  be  a  separate  letter."  ^ 

The  archbishop  did  as  he  was  requested  ;  the 
Cabinet  meeting  accepted  the  Lord  Chancellor's  views, 
and  the  latter,  according  to  a  Minute  of  his,  "  laid  before 
the  Lords  a  letter  which  he  had  received  that  day  from 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  acquainting  him  with 
his  Grace's  opinion  to  the  like  effect." 

Newcastle  became  Prime  Minister — and  but  a  sorry 
one.    He  could  not  at  first  agree  with  either  Fox  or 

1  Life  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  ii.  514. 


1757]     HERRING  ON  THE  METHODISTS  219 


Pitt  to  lead  the  Commons  ;  but  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer,  Sir  Thomas  Robinson,  who  was  appointed, 
was  a  failure,  and  after  a  year  Fox  took  the  post. 

Both  Herring  and  his  friend  Duncombe  shared  the 
dismay  of  the  religious  world  at  the  posthumous  works 
of  Bolingbroke,  and  Duncombe  had  and  communicated 
to  the  archbishop  the  idea  of  attempting  some  counter- 
blast in  which  Cicero  was  to  be  called  in  aid.  Herring 
sensibly  insists  on  the  reply,  if  any,  being  wise, 
"  knowing,"  as  he  says,  "  that  several  weak  pens  are 
at  work  upon  Bolingbroke.  I  own,"  he  adds,  "  I  have 
my  fears  on  this  head  that  more  harm  may  be  done 
than  good.  .  .  .  This  work  shd  not  be  trusted  to 
bunglers." 

Whatever  his  views  of  "  the  orthodox  "  Churchmen 
who  complained  of  the  omission  of  the  Athanasian 
Creed,  Herring  had  and  showed  the  smallest  possible 
sympathy  with  Whitefield  and  Wesley  and  the  rising  tide 
of  Methodism.  The  turning-point  in  the  history  of 
Methodism  in  relation  to  the  Church  was  not  reached 
till  1760,  when  the  Wesleyan  lay  preachers  got  authority 
to  preach  and  administer  the  Sacraments  in  their  own 
chapels.  But  it  was  not  far  off.  Herring's  views  on 
this  subject  are  best  expressed  in  his  own  language.  In 
a  letter  from  Croydon  House,  written  little  more  than  a 
year  before  his  death,  he  says  : 

"  Whitefield  is  Daniel  Burgess  redivivus,  and,  to  be 
sure,  he  finds  his  account  in  his  joco-serious  addresses. 
The  other  author  (John  Wesley),  in  my  opinion,  with 
good  parts  and  learning  is  a  most  dark  and  saturnine 
creature.  His  pictures  may  frighten  weak  people 
that  at  the  same  time  are  wicked,  but  I  fear  he  will 
make  few  converts,  except  for  a  day.  I  have  read  his 
serious  thoughts  on  the  earthquakes  at  Lisbon,  but  for 
my  own  part  I  think  the  rising  and  setting  of  the  sun  is 
a  more  durable  argument  for  religion  than  all  the 
extraordinary  convulsions  of  nature  put  together.  .  .  . 
For  myself  I  own  I  have  no  constitution  for  these 
frights  and  fervours  ;   and  if  I  can  but  keep  up  the 


220 


THOMAS  HERRING  [i747- 


regular  practice  of  a  Christian  life  upon  Christian 
principles  I  shall  be  in  no  pain  for  futurity.  .  .  .  The 
subjects  you  mention  of  the  Methodist  preaching  are 
excellent  in  the  hands  of  wise  men  (not  enthusiasts). 
Religion  for  the  practice  of  the  world  must  be  plain 
and  intelligible  to  the  lowest  understanding.  ...  As 
to  their  notion  that  men  are  by  nature  devils,  I  can  tell 
it  by  no  other  name  than  wicked  and  blasphemous, 
and  the  highest  reproach  that  man  can  throw  upon  his 
good  and  wise  Creator." 

The  last  years  of  Archbishop  Herring's  life  were 
years  of  great  public  anxiet}^  The  King's  only  thought 
was  for  the  safet}^  of  Hanover,  and  he  agreed  to  treaties 
giving  subsidies  to  foreign  states  who  would  find  troops 
to  defend  it.  The  tension  between  England  and  France 
in  North  America  was  of  the  acutest,  and  Newcastle 
was  not  the  man  to  conduct  a  great  war  against  a  great 
nation. 

We  get  one  or  two  notes  on  current  events  in 
Herring's  correspondence  with  Dr.  Nathanael  Forster, 
who  had  been  Domestic  Chaplain  to  the  great  Bishop 
Butler,  and  was  his  executor,  and  who  was  afterwards 
one  of  Herring's  chaplains.^ 

In  the  summer  of  1755,  George  11.  went  abroad  to 
see  after  and  enjoy  his  beloved  Hanover,  and  at  the 
same  time  Boscawen  sailed  with  a  fleet  from  Portsmouth 
with  half-hearted  instructions  to  attack  the  French 
fleet  should  it  descend  on  Canada.  Hawke  was  in 
command  of  some  of  Boscawen 's  ships,  and  he  managed 
to  engage  the  Frenchmen,  capturing  the  Alcide  and 
another  French  vessel.  The  British  transports  got  into 
St.  Lawrence.  December  saw  the  disastrous  defeat  at 
Fort  Duquesne  of  General  Braddock — a  brave  but 
unintelligent  oflficer  who  underrated  the  American 
levies  because  their  efficiency  in  drill  did  not  equal  that 
of  the  Guards  in  Hyde  Park. 

In  a  letter  from  Croydon  House,  dated  7th  July 
17s 5,  Herring  says  : 

*  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ix.  294. 


1 757]  WAR  WITH  FRANCE 


221 


"  I  can  send  you  no  news  from  hence  ;  nor  will 
anything  arise,  I  apprehend,  till  we  hear  of  Boscawen. 
Nothing  can  be  wiser  than  to  avoid  a  war  in  Europe  if 
possible  ;  and  yet  it  will  be  an  ugly  thing  if  we  suffer 
as  James  i.  used  to  do  by  our  obdurate  patience.  They 
say  the  French  Martinico  fleet  are  returning  ;  and  our 
citizens  will  grumble  if  they  get  safe  into  port  under 
the  cover  of  our  negotiation,  while  Hawke  lies  at  top 
and  top-gallant  at  Spithead." 

Again,  on  2  ist  July,  he  writes  : 

"  You  have  seen  the  particulars  of  the  American 
skirmish.  The  issue  of  it  pleases  the  City  and  is  of 
credit  to  us.  .  .  .  The  cash  on  board  the  Alcide  was 
under  £%ooo.  There  were  some  of  their  best  engineers  ; 
and  this  circumstance  and  the  number  of  soldiers  on 
board,  and  men  that  got  into  Lewisburgh,  may  prove 
a  weakening  and  a  present  disappointment.  The 
worst  is,  I  doubt,  the  expedition  is  at  an  end  :  there 
is  reason  to  think  the  transports  got  into  St.  Lawrence, 
and  our  men  are  rich  ;  but  don't  tell  this  to  your 
Jacobites." 

A  month  later,  on  3rd  August,  he  writes  : 

"  We  are  very  alert  here  ;  and,  as  the  statesmen  say, 
with  good  reason  on  the  success  in  Nova  Scotia,  and 
if  Braddock  and  his  associates  do  well,  and  our  Boston- 
eers  can  have  the  honesty  and  resolution  to  starve  the 
garrison  at  Lewisburgh,  I  think  Monsieur  must  keep 
quiet." 

"  But  no  Te  Deums  before  a  victory,"  wisely  adds 
Herring. 

There  were  unusual  storms  in  the  fall  of  1755  ;  there 
was  great  anxiety  as  to  the  operations  in  America 
against  the  French  with  whom  we  were  fast  drifting 
into  war  ;  though  a  small  success  under  Johnson  was 
welcomed  as  wiping  out  Braddock's  disaster.  Pitt  was 
not  yet  in  the  saddle,  nor  Fox,  only  the  Duke  of  New- 
castle, who  was  unequal  to  the  task. 

On  I  St  November  all  western  Europe  was  startled 


222 


THOMAS  HERRING  [i747- 


by  the  earthquake  at  Lisbon,  causing  thirty  thousand 
deaths.  London  was  frightened.  A  "  general  and 
pubhc  "  Fast  was  ordered  by  Proclamation  issued  on 
the  20th  November,  which  recited  the  manifold  sins 
and  wickedness  of  these  kingdoms  had  deserved 
punishments,  how  the  Almighty  had  protected  us 
"  especially  at  this  time  when  some  neighbouring 
countries  have  been  visited  with  a  most  dreadful  and 
extensive  earthquake."  The  Fast  was  fixed  for 
6th  February.^  Herring  had  to  prepare  a  Form  of 
Prayer,  and  he  wTites  to  his  chaplain,  Forster  : 

"  J th  December  1755. 
"  I  have  thoughts  of  attending  the  House  on 
Wednesday,  and  shall  then  talk  fully  with  you  on  the 
subject  of  the  Fast.  In  the  meantime  I  beg  the  favour 
of  you  to  look  out  for  the  Form  of  Pra^^er  on  account 
of  the  Great  Storm,  1703,  and  see  whether  anj^thing 
of  this  kind  was  done  when  Port  Royal  at  Jamaica 
sunk  into  the  sea." 

The  wording  of  the  Form  caused  anxiet}^,  and  he 
writes  twice  more  to  Forster  : 

"  2i)th  December  1755. 
"  The  little  wits  found  fault  once  with  Rock  of 
Defence  coming  so  near  our  Fleets.  Is  it  worth  while 
to  change  the  words  Rock  of  into  never-failing  Defence  ? 
or  does  any  other  Scripture  expression  occur  to  you 
to  insert  instead  oi  Rock  ofl" 

"  27th  December  1755. 

"  I  onl}'  meant  in  m}'  title  to  specify  the  reason  of 
the  Fast  ;  and  left  the  Printer  in  other  respects  to 
follow  the  usual  form,  which  3'ou  will  be  so  good  as 
to  see  to.  You  will  be  pleased  to  make  the  alteration 
by  the  words  never-failing  Deliverer.  The  Bishop  of 
Lincoln  accepts  the  duty  of  the  Fast  Sermon." 

This  was  Dr.  John  Thomas.  The  Fast  was  duly 
observed.  Forster  preached  before  the  Court,  the 
Bishop  of  Lincoln  before  the  Lords,  and  Terrick  before 

*  Gentleman' s  Magazine,  xxv.  570. 


1757]         MASQUERADES  GIVEN  UP  223 


the  Commons.  "  There  were  the  greatest  crowds," 
says  the  Gentleman' s  Magazine,^" at  most  of  the  churches, 
both  in  London  and  Westminster,  ever  known  on  any 
occasion."  The  Lord  Mayor  had  to  send  and  re- 
monstrate with  some  Quakers  in  the  city  who  would 
keep  their  offices  open. 

Lord  Mahon  says  that  the  Masquerades,  which  the 
archbishop  had  in  vain  tried  to  stop,  were  given  up 
through  the  panic.  Horace  Walpole  in  his  worst 
style  says  on  the  22nd  January  1756  :  "We  were  to 
have  had  a  masquerade  to-night,  but  the  Bishops,  who, 
you  know,  have  always  persisted  in  God's  hating 
dominoes,  have  made  an  Earthquake  point  of  it  and 
postponed  it  till  after  the  fast." 

1756  saw  Pitt  dismissed  because  he  would  not  fall  in 
with  the  King's  Hanoverian  ideas,  and  Minorca  lost. 
The  archbishop  was  well  enough  to  give  a  grand 
breakfast  party  at  Croydon  to  the  young  Prince  of 
Wales,  his  mother  and  brother,  but  about  the  time 
he  writes  to  his  old  friend  Hardwicke  : 

"  It  is  now  a  real  pain  to  me  to  walk  a  few  yards,  the' 
I  confine  myself  to  the  slow  pace  of  the  tortoise  in  the 
garden.  ...  To  your  Lordship  and  all  my  friends  in 
private  I  shall  be  the  same,  that  is,  always  receiving  such 
cheerful  sensations  from  my  correspondence  with  them 
as  may  be  supposed  to  arise  in  the  breast  of  a  most 
affectionate  friend." 

The  end  was  approaching,  and  the  archbishop  met 
it  with  calmness. 

On  22nd  June  1756  he  writes  to  Buncombe  : 

"  I  continue  extremely  out  of  order,  I  think  in  a 
confirmed  dropsy.  ...  I  have  now  been  half  a  year 
in  this  dismal  way  .  .  .  everything  I  take  feeds  the 
distemper  for 

'  Keady  oft  the  port  t'  obtain, 
I'm  shipwrecked  into  life  again.' 


^  xxvi.  89. 


224 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


"  I  know  who  sent  me  hither  and  how  much  it  is 
my  duty  to  attend  his  summons  for  a  removal,  but 
life  is  over  with  me  ;  and  I  sometimes  in  my  airing 
repeat  two  pretty  lines  of  Parnell, 

'  But  what  are  fields  or  flowers  or  air  to  me  ? 
Ah!  tasteless  all,  if  not  enjoyed  with  thee, 
O  health.' " 

The  autumn  of  1756  saw  the  retirement  of  Newcastle. 
The  war  was  more  than  he  could  manage.  Herring 
consoles  him  on  i8th  November  :  "  It  is  not  possible  for 
me  to  wait  upon  your  Grace.  Your  Grace  has  found  it 
necessary  to  withdraw  yourself  from  public  business  ; 
you  have  seen  this  nation  distracted  before  and  have 
had  your  share  in  preserving  it  from  impending  ruin.  .  .  . 
Your  Grace  can  never  la}^  aside  the  character  of  a 
faithful  subject  to  your  King  and  country." 

Herring's  patriotism  remained  unquenched  to  the 
last.  The  latest  letter  in  the  Buncombe  correspondence 
relates  how  a  regiment  of  Hessians,  either  mercenaries 
or  allies  in  the  Seven  Years'  War  against  France 
which  had  just  begun,  under  Colonel  Canitz,  was 
quartered  at  Croydon  and  Bromley.  The  law  at  the 
time — perhaps  wisely,  we  should  say — made  no  pro- 
vision for  quartering  foreign  troops.  But  the  arch- 
bishop would  not  have  them  go  short  ;  and  so  he  sent 
them  a  "  Yorkshire  pye,"  which  had  been  sent  as  a 
present  to  him,  and  a  parcel  of  wine  ;  "  they  should 
have,"  said  he,  "  every  accommodatn  he  cd  procure 
them."i 

There  is  one  more  letter  to  Newcastle,  who,  though 
fallen,  had  all  the  power  his  pocket  boroughs  could 
give  and  still  dabbled  in  patronage.  The  poor  arch- 
bishop sa3-s  on  8th  March  1757  :  "  Though  my  extream 
illness  confines  me  almost  to  my  bedchamber,  I  will  do 
all  I  can  to  oblige  your  Ldship." 

On  13th  March  1757,  Herring  died.  He  was 
aged  sixty-four.    A  scholarly  author  of  the  time,  Dr. 

»  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32869,  ^.  84. 


1757]  BURIAL  BEQUESTS 


225 


Jortin,  the  biographer  of  Erasmus,  says  :  "  Few  great 
men  passed  through  this  malevolent  world  better  be- 
loved and  less  censured  than  he."^ 

By  his  will  he  directed  that  he  should  be  buried  in 
a  private  manner,  and  forbade  any  monument ;  and 
accordingly  he  was  buried  quietly  in  the  vault  of 
Croydon  Church,  with  a  plain  black  stone  and  the 
inscription,  "  Here  lieth  the  body  of  the  Most  Rev.  Dr. 
Thomas  Herring,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who  died 
Mar.  xiii.  A.D.  MDCCLVII.,  aged  LXIV."  Croydon 
Church  was  burnt  down  on  5th  January  1867.  A  tablet 
on  the  wall  in  the  N.W.  corner  of  the  Southern  Chapel 
of  the  new  Parish  Church  records  that  Herring's  remains 
lie  buried  near. 

Compared  with  his  predecessor.  Herring  died  a 
poor  man,  his  fortune  being  given  in  the  Gentleman' s 
Magazine  of  the  time  at  10,000.  The  same  authority 
says  he  was  very  charitable.  By  his  will,  beyond  his 
directions  against  funeral  pomp  and  a  monument, 
Herring  made  two  dispositions  of  interest.  The  first, 
in  favour  of  the  great  Lord  Chancellor  to  whom  he 
owed  perhaps  much,  is  in  the  following  terms  :  "  I 
beg  the  favour  of  the  Earl  of  Hardwicke,  my  ever 
honoured  friend,  to  accept  my  topaz  seal  engraved 
by  Yeo  and  the  head  of  Bishop  Fleetwood  of  Ely 
painted  by  Richardson."  The  latter  he  mentions  in  a 
letter  written  not  long  after  his  appointment  to  Canter- 
bury that  he  had  bought  from  the  artist's  son  in  Queen 
Square.    Bishop  Fleetwood  had  been  his  early  patron. 

Herring  had  always  maintained  his  interest  in  his 
old  college.  The  master,  Mr.  Castle,  had  been  his 
guest  at  Bishopthorpe,  three  of  his  relations  had  been 
fellows;  and  Heaton,  another  fellow  of  the  college,  was 
one  of  his  domestic  chaplains  at  Lambeth,  and  re- 
warded by  the  archbishop  after  the  manner  of  those 
days  with  a  rectory,  a  vicarage,  a  prebend,  and  a 
mastership  of  a  hospital.    By  his  will  the  archbishop 

*  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32870,  f.  249. 


226 


THOMAS  HERRING 


[1747- 


left  ;£iooo  to  the  Sons  of  the  Clergj^  Corporation,  and 
to  his  old  College  at  Cambridge,  ;<^iooo.  South  Sea 
annuities  towards  rebuilding  the  college,  with  a  pro- 
vision that  should  there  be  no  prospect  of  rebuilding 
the  college  after  the  lapse  of  a  competent  number  of 
years,  the  income  was  to  be  applied  to  the  necessary- 
repairs  of  "  the  old  house,"  or  in  acts  of  charity  as 
helping  poor  scholars  or  honest  servants,  of  which  the 
master  was  to  give  an  account  "  not  subject  to  control  " 
at  every  usual  audit. 

For  his  servants,  b}^  whom,  we  are  told,  he  was 
"  carefulh^  obeyed  and  cordially  lamented,"  he  made  a 
handsome  provision  by  his  will.  He  did  not  fail  in 
his  archiepiscopal  charities.  In  his  time  the  "  dole  " 
regularly  given  at  Lambeth  was  distributable  at  the 
gate  of  Croydon  Palace.  The  dole  was  given  to  thirty 
poor  people  three  times  a  week  to  ten  persons  at  a  time, 
each  receiving  2  lb.  weight  of  beef,  a  pitcher  of  broth, 
a  half-quartern  loaf,  and  twopence  in  mone3^  Herring 
was  never  married.  An  amusing  story  is  told  of  him 
in  this  connection.  During  his  severe  illness  in  1753, 
Count  Zinzendorff ,  the  leader  of  the  sect  of  the  Moravians 
then  active  in  England,  and  with  whom  John  Wesley 
from  1738  to  1740  was  in  close  alliance,  wrote  to  the 
archbishop  a  letter  in  which  he  not  only  wished  him 
a  perfect  recovery,  but  tendered  him  ghostly  absolution, 
notwithstanding  the  "great  sin  of  omission"  of  which 
he  had  been  guilt}'.  This  letter  the  archbishop  showed 
to  a  friend,  professing  that  though  doubtless  guilt\"  of 
many  sins  of  omission  as  well  as  commission  he  had  no 
idea  of  the  particular  sin  the  Count  referred  to.  "  Your 
Grace,  I  perceive,"  replied  the  friend,  "  is  not  much 
acquainted  with  the  tenets  of  the  Moravians  ;  if  3'ou 
were,  my  lord,  you  must  have  known  that  with  them 
the  great  sin  of  omission  is  celibacy.  Your  Grace  is  a 
bachelor." 

Herring's  views  on  publishing  sermons  we  have 
given.    He  adhered  to  them.    In  his  last  illness,  in 


1757]       PERSONAL  CHARACTERISTICS  227 


what  his  friend  Duncombe  calls  "  a  languid  moment," 
he  destroyed  all  his  MSS,  sermons,  etc.  In  1763, 
Duncombe  collected  and  published  in  one  volume  the 
Seven  Sermons  on  Public  Occasions,  which  had  been 
printed  (all  but  two  by  command)  by  the  archbishop 
in  his  lifetime.  But  one  of  his  three  nephews  writes 
after  his  death  to  Dr.  Ducarel,  who  was  contemplating 
publishing  some  Memoirs  of  the  archbishop  :  ^ 

"As  to  printing  a  thing  of  this  kind,  or  anything 
else  relating  to  him,  or  even  reprinting  his  sermons,  it 
would  be  so  expressly  contrary  to  his  injunctions  and 
dying  request  to  us  that  I  am  persuaded  no  true  friend 
of  his  Grace's  when  informed  of  it  would  desire  to 
do  it." 

He  thinks,  however,  that  what  Ducarel  proposes 
would  not  be  objected  to  by  the  family. 

In  appearance  Herring  is  described  by  his  friend 
Bishop  Squire  of  St.  David's  as  tall  and  comely  in 
person.  He  sat  to  Hogarth  for  his  picture,  but  the 
result  was  thought  by  his  friends  much  too  severe. 
So  far  from  the  05  placidum  moresque  benigni  char- 
acteristic of  Herring,  the  picture  rather  depicted 
features  expressive  of  a  Bonner  who  could  burn  a 
heretic. 

"Lovat's  hard  features  Hogarth  might  command, 
A  Herring's  sweetness  asks  a  Reynolds'  hand." 

Throughout  life  he  had  delicate  health  and  a  ten- 
dency to  asthma,  which  made  him  prefer  to  sleep  out  of 
London.  He  suffered  from  the  age  of  twenty  from 
"  disagreeable  palpitations,"  for  which  he  prescribed 
himself  "  exercise  (riding)  and  good  company."  Much 
of  his  delicacy  he  attributed  to  his  being  put  to  sleep 
in  damp  sheets  when  at  college. 

To  those  who  asked  him  for  preferment,  his  kindness 
of  manner  is  said  to  have  aided  the  anxiety  of  the 
petitioner  and  removed  his  suspense  as  soon  as  possible. 
^Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ix.  312. 


228 


THOMAS  HERRING  [1747- 


Bishop  Squire  was  indebted  to  Herring  for  pro- 
motion. Squire  had  been  chaplain  and  private  secretary 
to  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  as  Chancellor  of  the  University 
of  Cambridge  in  1749,^  and  in  the  following  year  Arch- 
bishop Herring  gave  him  the  Rectory  of  St.  Anne's, 
Westminster.  The  transaction  had  a  truly  eighteenth- 
century  flavour  ;  for  Herring  had  the  presentation  as 
an  "  option  "  from  the  Bishopric  of  London,  and  Squire 
gave  up  the  living  of  Topsfield  in  Essex  in  favour  of  a 
relation  of  the  archbishop.  Squire  attained  eminence 
both  as  an  author  and  cleric,  and  was  made  Bishop  of 
St.  David's  in  1761,  but  his  character  of  Herring  is  too 
unctuous  and  fulsome  to  be  of  much  use  to  a  biographer. 
It  may  be  found  in  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ii.  357. 
We  give  a  few  extracts  from  it  : 

"  His  distinguished  application  to  the  business  of 
his  function,  his  learning,  his  warm  attachment  to  the 
Constitution  in  Church  and  State,  and  his  pathetic 
eloquence  in  the  pulpit  having  recommended  him  to  the 
early  notice  of  the  great  ;  he  ever  afterwards  main- 
tained himself  in  the  possession  of  their  favour,  esteem, 
and  affection  by  his  ingenuous  conversation  and  by  his 
singular  candour,  temper,  and  moderation.  .  .  . 

"  So  kind  and  obliging  was  his  Grace's  manner  in 
conferring  favours  that  it  added  a  double  pleasure  to 
the  receiver.  He  felt  the  anxiety  of  the  doubtful 
petitioner  and  removed  his  suspense  as  soon  as  possible  ; 
and  when  forced  to  deny  a  request  he  always  seasoned 
the  refusal  with  every  circumstance  of  benevolence 
which  might  render  the  disappointment  less  grievous, 

"  Conscious  of  the  uprightness  of  his  own  heart,  and 
of  the  sincerity  of  his  belief  of  the  doctrine  and  precepts 
of  the  Gospel,  he  was  willing  to  think  the  best  of  other 
people's  principles  and  to  live  the  friend  of  mankind." 

With  the  estates  of  his  sees  he  is  said  to  have  dealt 
handsomely.  He  improved  the  gardens  at  Bishop- 
thorpe  and  gave  a  new  clock  to  the  turret.  He  restored 
the  archbishop's  house  at  Croydon,  and  beautified 

*  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ii.  348. 


1757]       EXPENDITURE  ON  LAMBETH 


the  gardens,  laying  out  altogether  between  ;^;6ooo  and 
£7000  on  the  houses  at  Lambeth  and  Croydon.  His 
work  at  Lambeth  included  alterations  in  the  little  or 
inner  cloisters — part  of  the  magnum  claustrum  and 
parvum  claustrum  mentioned  in  the  steward  at  Lam- 
beth's accounts  for  1224  and  1443.  These  lay  on  the 
north  side  of  the  chapel  supported  by  twelve  pillars, 
and  were  taken  down  by  order  of  Herring.  It  had 
been  called  the  burying-ground.  Herring  had  it  dug 
and  the  weeds  removed,  but  no  bones  were  found. 


MATTHEW  HUTTON 


1757-1758 

Matthew  Hutton,  Herring's  successor  at  Canterbury, 
enjoys  the  unique  distinction  of  having,  as  Archbishop 
of  York,  been  the  Uneal  descendant  of  another  Matthew 
Hutton,  Archbishop  of  York,  one  hundred  and  fifty 
years  before. 

The  archbishop's  father  was  the  great-great-grandson 
of  the  archbishop  of  Queen  Ehzabeth's  days  ;  and  the 
family  seems  to  have  been  settled  at  Marske  for  a 
considerable  part  of  the  time.  Marske  is  about  four 
miles  from  Richmond,  and  there  is  in  Richmond  Church 
a  monument  with  a  long  inscription  and  figures  of 
Sir  Timothy  Hutton  and  his  lady  and  their  twelve 
children.  Sir  Timothy  was  son  of  the  first  arch- 
bishop. 

Matthew  Hutton  the  second  was  born  at  Marske  in 
Yorkshire  on  3rd  January  1693,  being  the  second  son 
of  John  Hutton  of  Marske,  his  mother  being  Dorothy, 
daughter  of  William  Dyche  or  Dyke  of  Trant,  in  Sussex. 
When  eight  years  old  he  was  sent  to  school  at  Kirby 
Hill  near  Richmond,  the  master  of  which  was  Mr.  Loyd 
of  Jesus  College,  Cambridge,  and  on  the  latter  being 
moved  in  1704  to  Ripon,  Hutton  followed  him  to  the 
Free  School  there,  where  he  remained  till  1710.  On 
22nd  June  1 7 10,  Hutton  was  admitted  to  his  master's 
college,  Jesus,  at  Cambridge,  where  he  took  his  B.A. 
degree  in  171 3,  and  was  ordained  deacon  by  Bishop 
Fleetwood  of  Ely. 

The  Duke  of  Somerset  was  at  the  time  Chancellor 

of  the  University  ;  and  Hutton  seems  to  have  attracted 

330 


1 757-1758]      ATTENDS  GEORGE  II 


231 


the  favourable  attention  of  the  Chancellor,  for  the 
latter  having  appointed  one  of  his  chaplains,  Dr.  Grigg, 
Master  of  Clare — the  appointment  falling  to  the  Chan- 
cellor through  default  of  the  fellows  to  elect — His 
Grace  filled  up  his  own  chaplaincy  by  appointing 
Hutton  to  that  office.  He  was  elected  Fellow  of  Christ's 
on  8th  July  171 7,  and  in  that  year  proceeded  M.A.  He 
was  again  Grigg 's  successor,  for,  on  Grigg 's  death  in 
1726,  the  Duke  of  Somerset  appointed  Hutton  to  the 
Rectory  of  Trowbridge  in  Wiltshire,  which  Grigg  had 
held.  Having  taken  his  D.D.  in  1728,  he  was  the  next 
year  further  advanced,  being  presented  by  his  patron 
to  the  valuable  living  of  Spoflforth  in  Yorkshire.  He 
was  also  appointed  a  Prebend  of  York  by  Archbishop 
Blackburn.  He  was  afterwards  appointed  one  of  the 
King's  Chaplains  in  Ordinary,  and  as  such  attended 
George  11.  on  his  visit  to  Hanover  in  1736.  He  seems 
to  have  ingratiated  himself  with  the  King,  for  in 
1737  he  was  made  Canon  of  Windsor,  which  he 
exchanged  a  year  later  for  a  prebend  of  Westminster, 
vacant  by  the  resignation  or  flight  of  R.  Thistle- 
thwaite. 

Hutton  seems  now  to  have  begun  his  series  of  suc- 
cessions to  Herring.  While  Prebend  of  Westminster 
he  bestirred  himself  to  get  preferment,  at  least  we  judge 
so  from  his  language  in  a  letter  written  when  he  was 
trying  for  and  seemed  unlikely  to  get  a  bishopric  that 
was  vacant,  and  talks  of  "  meeting  with  another  dis- 
appointment." In  March  1743  Bangor  was  or  was 
likely  to  be  vacant  through  Herring's  promotion  to 
York.  Newcastle  was  Hutton 's  friend  and  was  an 
arch-dispenser  of  ecclesiastical  patronage  :  with  smaller 
ecclesiastical  places  he  could  do  pretty  much  as  he 
hked,  but  bishoprics  on  most,  if  not  all,  occasions  were 
for  the  monarch  to  give  away.  Hutton  had,  as  we  have 
said,  attended  the  King  as  his  chaplain  on  a  visit  to 
Hanover,  and  ought  to  have  been  sure  of  no  hitch 
with  his  royal  master.  We  are  surprised,  therefore, 
16 


232 


MATTHEW  HUTTON 


[1757- 


to  find  Newcastle  writing  to  Hutton  under  date  30th 
March  1743  : 

"  I  this  day  recommended  you  to  the  King  in  the  best 
and  most  earnest  manner  I  was  able,  but  to  my  great 
surprise  received  such  an  answer  from  His  Majesty  to 
my  application  that  makes  it  highly  improper  for  me 
to  mention  it  to  him  again."  ^ 

The  Minister  advises  Hutton  to  wait  upon  the  arch- 
bishop and  lay  "  the  unprecedented  hardship  "  of  his 
case  before  him,  and  desire  his  Grace's  interposition 
with  His  Majesty  in  his  favour. 

Next  day  Hutton  writes  back  referring,  as  we  have 
said,  to  the  chance  of  "  another  disappointment,"  and 
saying  that  he  is  going  to  get  Newcastle's  "  very  kind 
recommendation  seconded  by  the  Archbishop."^  But 
George  11.  seems  at  this  time  to  have  been  indifferent, 
if  not  hostile,  to  Hutton's  claim  to  go  to  Bangor,  and 
not  to  have  recognised  "  the  unprecedented  hardship  " 
of  his  case,  whatever  that  may  have  been.  For  on  the 
7th  April  the  Archbishop  writes  to  Newcastle  :  "I 
acquainted  Mr.  Pelham  that  I  had  again  moved  for 
Dr.  Hutton  without  much  effect.  Your  Grace  may 
still  find  better  success."  ^ 

In  the  end  all  difficulties  were  overcome,  and  by 
the  end  of  the  year  Hutton  was  Bishop  of  Bangor, 
being  consecrated  in  Lambeth  Palace,  13th  November 
1743,  by  commission  from  Archbishop  Potter,  then 
indisposed,  directed  to  the  Bishops  of  Rochester,  Exeter, 
Worcester,  and  Bristol.  Upon  his  elevation  to  the 
Episcopate,  he  resigned  his  stall  at  Westminster. 

Horace  Walpole  in  his  Memoirs,  speaking  of  Hutton 
a  few  years  later,  describes  him  as  "  well  bred  and 
devoted  to  the  Ministry."  He  was  a  friend  of  the 
Duke  of  Newcastle,  and  to  this  friendship  and  to  his 
being  a  whole-hearted  Ministers'  man  he  probably  owed 
his  further  preferment. 

1  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32700,  f.  87. 
*  Ubi  supra,  i.  91.  '  Ubi  supra,  f.  100. 


1758]      MADE  ARCHBISHOP  OF  YORK  233 


But  in  1 747,  when  Herring  went  to  Canterbury,  Hutton 
succeeded  him  at  York,  being  confirmed  Archbishop  of 
York,  loth  December  1747,  in  the  Parish  Church  of  St. 
Martin-in-the-Fields.  It  would  appear  from  Herring's 
correspondence  with  Lord  Hardwicke,  that  if  Herring 
had  allowed  his  reluctance  to  take  the  primacy  to 
overcome  his  desire  to  please  his  patron,  Hutton 
would  have  gone  to  Canterbury  in  his  place  in  1747. 
The  Treaty  of  Aix-la-Chapelle  in  1748  brought  the 
war  of  the  Austrian  Succession  to  an  end.  Prussia 
got  Silesia  ;  otherwise  the  great  Powers  stood  much 
as  they  had  been  before  the  war.  The  Peace  was 
popular,  as  so  often,  in  England.  Hutton 's  early  ex- 
periences as  Archbishop  of  York  are  described  in  the 
following  letter  to  Newcastle  under  date  the  28th  May 
1748  : 

"  After  passing  through  the  largest  part  of  my 
diocese,  finding  nothing  disagreeable  in  my  task  or  the 
people  with  whom  I  have  to  do,  and  resting  two  or  three 
days  in  a  very  pleasant  dwelling,  I  should  be  ungrateful 
not  to  thank  you  in  being  the  instrument  of  placing  me 
in  so  happy  a  situation."^ 

He  says  he  found  "  at  six  considerable  towns  "  he 
had  already  visited  "  everything  easy  and  the  clergy 
in  good  temper.  The  prospect  of  peace  is  everywhere 
agreeable,  and  he  heard  it  nowhere  spoken  against 
except  at  Wakefield.  They  had  had  a  glorious  trade 
for  their  cloth  during  the  last  years  of  the  war  and  did 
not  like  losing  it." 

George  11.  had  by  this  time  quite  forgotten  anything 
like  disfavour  to  Hutton,  and  Newcastle,  writing  to 
communicate  to  him  the  episcopal  changes  consequent 
on  Bishop  Gibson's  death,  says  that  the  King  of  himself 
intended  to  make  Hutton  Almoner.  "  It  is  a  trouble- 
some office,"  says  Newcastle,  "  the  manner  of  the 
King's  doing  it  arising  singly  from  himself  show'd  to 

*  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32715,  f.  126. 


MATTHEW  HUTTON  [1757- 


me  so  true  a  regard  for  your  Grace  that  it  has  given  me 
great  pleasure."  ^ 

Hutton  was  undoubtedly  on  ver}^  friendly  terms 
with  the  Duke  of  Newcastle.  There  is  an  interesting, 
almost  amusing,  letter  from  the  newly  appointed  arch- 
bishop to  the  Minister,  who  asked  for  the  preferment 
of  a  gentleman  of  good  famil}'  whom  Ministers  wanted  to 
please.  "  An  objection,"  says  the  archbishop,  "  occurs 
to  me  which  I  cannot  get  over.  How  can  it  be  expected 
that  I  shd  lay  myself  under  a  promise  to  give  one  of 
the  best  prebends  in  m}''  Church  to  an  entire  stranger 
unconnected  with  me  or  my  diocese,  already  provided 
of  a  prebend  of  Chester  with  other  preferment  and  a 
pretty  good  temporal  estate,  —  son-in-law  to  a  bishop 
who  has  as  many  prebends  to  dispose  of  in  the  church 
of  Litchfield  as  I  have  at  York.  Can  it  be  thought 
reasonable  that  I  shd  give  the  preference  to  this  gentle- 
man before  every  one  of  my  own  chaplains,  friends,  and 
relations,  and  baulk  the  expectation  of  some  of  the 
Principal  Gentlemen  and  friends  of  the  Government  in 
Yorkshire  with  whom  I  have  lived  in  esteem  from  my 
infancy  ?  "  ^ 

True  to  Horace  Walpole's  character  of  him  as 
"  devoted  to  the  Ministry  "  of  Pelham  and  Newcastle, 
Hutton  writes  to  the  latter  on  nth  July  1750  : 

"  Nothing  has  occurred  in  this  country  worthy  of 
3'our  Grace's  notice  unless  it  be  that  everything  goes 
well.  The  gentlemen  seem  to  be  in  general  harmony 
with  one  another  ;  and  the  flourishing  state  of  the 
woollen  trade  makes  them  support  the  Government." 

George  11.  had  recovered  from  an  attack  of  the  gout  ; 
Hutton  sympathises.  After  rejoicing  at  the  King's 
good  health,  he  adds  :  "  If  I  may  judge  by  myself  a 
gentle  fit  of  gout  in  the  foot  will  be  a  probable  means 
of  making  it  more  perfect."  ' 

1  Newcastle  Coir.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32717,  f.  233. 
*  Ubi  supra,  32718,  i.  35.  ^  Ubi  supra,  32721,  f.  307. 


1758] 


ACTS  FOR  THE  PRIMATE 


235 


As  he  had  followed  Herring  in  his  other  promotions, 
he  was  named  his  successor  at  Canterbury,  being  con- 
firmed Archbishop  of  Canterbury  at  St.  Mary-le-Bow 
on  29th  April  1757.  Horace  Walpole  gives  no  details 
of  the  selection  of  Hutton  as  successor  to  Herring,  his 
only  comment  being  that  the  latter  was  "  succeeded  by 
Hutton,  Archbishop  of  York,  a  finer  gentleman,  except 
where  money  was  concerned." 

But  the  Newcastle  correspondence  seems  to  make 
it  clear  that  it  was  Newcastle  who  was  responsible  for 
the  choice  of  a  new  Primate,  tliough  in  form  another 
nominated  him.    Newcastle  had,  in  fact,  resigned  the 
Prime  Ministership  in  the  autumn  of  1756,  but,  as  we 
have  said,  retained  his  voice  in  the  disposal  of  patronage. 
It  is  probable,  too,  that  during  Herring's  last  illness, 
Hutton  had  to  some  extent  filled  the  Primate's  place. 
As  far  back  as  October  1753,  Herring  writes  to  New- 
castle that  with  none  of  the  bishops  could  Ministers 
communicate  during  the  Primate's  absence  "  with  so 
much  propriety  and  safety  as  with  the  Archbishop  of 
York,"  saying  that  "  in  matters  of  debate  which  relate 
to  public  affairs  "  the  Archbishop  of  York  "  has  great 
judgment  and  equal  integrity."  ^    Again,  in  the  spring 
of  1755,  when  affairs  in  America  were  very  strained 
between  England  and  France,  and  the  Government 
tried  to  rouse  the  S.P.G.  missionaries  in  America  to 
exert  themselves  on  behalf  of  George  11. 's  government, 
we  find  it  is  the  Archbishop  of  York  who  encloses  to 
Newcastle  a  copy  of  the  very  strongly  worded  instruc- 
tions to  their  missionaries  which  a  Special  Committee 
of  the  S.P.G.  had  prepared.    These  spoke  of  the  French 
as  "  wicked   and   barbarous  aggressors,"  compassing 
the  "  compleat  ruin  of  all  the  British  settlements  " 
and  "  to  change  the  happy  condition  of  our  American 
fellow  -  subjects  under  the  best  of  Kings  for  certain 
tyranny,  wretched  superstition,  and  Popish  idolatry." 
In  the  absence  of  a  formidable  competitor  these  things 
>  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32733.  f.  162. 


236 


MATTHEW  HUTTON 


[1757- 


may  have  indicated  Hutton  as  the  man  to  go  to  Canter- 
bu^3^  At  any  rate,  we  find  Newcastle  ^^Tites  to  him 
on  the  24th  ]\Iarch  1757.  "  His  Majesty,"  says  the 
Minister,  "  has  been  pleased  that  day  to  order  the  Duke 
of  Devonshire  to  propose  to  your  Grace  the  translation 
to  Lambeth,  which  I  conclude  from  what  3'our  Grace 
had  said  to  me  on  that  subject,  your  Grace  has  accepted." 
He  goes  on  to  claim  the  real  credit  of  the  appointment, 
speaks  of  "  the  constant  and  uninterrupted  regard  I 
have  endeavoured  to  show  your  Grace,"  and  also  of 
"  what  your  Grace  knows  pass'd  with  his  Majesty  just 
before  I  left  his  service."^ 

Hutton's  reply,  fulsome  as  it  is,  certainly  treats 
Newcastle  as  the  author  of  his  advancement.  He 
speaks  of  "  his  gratitude  to  one  who  brought  me  into  the 
view  of  the  world  and  has  led  me  by  the  Hand  to  what 
I  am  now  arrived  at."  "  I  am,"  he  says,  "a  little 
diffident  of  m3-self  how  far  I  may  be  able  to  answer 
expectation  in  this  new  Promotion  ;  but  shall  endeavour 
to  make  good  the  defect  of  abilities  by  a  strict  and  steady 
attention  to  the  interests  of  Religion,  of  the  Publick,  and 
of  m}'  real  Friends."  Hutton  was  afterwards  elected 
President  of  the  Corporation  of  the  Sons  of  the  Clergy 
and  of  the  S.P.G. ;  a  Governor  of  the  Charter  House, 
and  sworn  of  the  Privy  Council.  He  confirmed  Gilbert, 
Bishop  of  Salisbury,  on  his  appointment  as  Archbishop 
of  York,  and  in  September  of  the  same  year  consecrated 
at  Lambeth  Terrick,  Bishop  of  Peterborough. 

Hutton  had  a  dispute  with  Herring's  executors  about 
the  dilapidations  at  Lambeth  Palace  ;  and  in  consequence 
of  this  never  went  into  residence  there.  He  lived,  how- 
ever, for  two  or  three  months  in  the  summer  at  Croydon 
Palace,  and  when  in  town  lived  at  his  own  house  in  Duke 
Street,  Westminster. 

The  latter  part  of  1757  found  Britain  with  trouble 
on  every  hand.    Dearth  of  corn  to  feed  the  masses  of 
the  people  led  to  riots  :  the  Seven  Years'  War  with 
1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32870,  f.  327. 


1758]  A  NAVY  BILL  AND  HABEAS  CORPUS  237 


France — or  rather  with  all  the  continental  Powers 
except  Russia — had  begun,  and  badly  with  the  defeat 
of  Cumberland  at  Hastenbeck  :  invasion  was  feared,  and 
Hessians  and  Hanoverians  poured  into  England  to  avert 
it.  Happily  the  elder  Pitt  was  again  in  office  jointly 
with  Newcastle.  The  archbishop  rightly  thought 
National  Humiliation  fitting,  and  writes  to  Newcastle 
on  22nd  November  1757:  "My  business  was  to  know 
chiefly  yr  Grace's  commands  as  to  a  Public  Fast,  which, 
if  there  be  no  material  objection,  seems  to  be  a  necessary 
duty."i 

Hutton's  tenure  of  the  primacy  was  very  brief, 
lasting  less  than  a  year.  And  the  end  seems  to  have 
been  unexpected,  coming  in  the  midst  of  his  ordinary 
avocations  as  Primate. 

In  the  session  that  began  in  December  1757  under  the 
Newcastle-Pitt  coalition,  two  of  the  principal  measures 
brought  forward  were  a  Navy  Bill  and  an  Act  to  amend 
the  Habeas  Corpus  Act.  They  were  both  good  measures. 
As  regards  the  former  the  law  as  it  then  stood  was  based 
on  the  rule  that  no  good  work,  perhaps  no  work  at  all, 
could  be  got  out  of  a  sailor  while  he  had  any  money  in 
his  pocket.  Of  the  purposes  for  which  Parliament 
voted  money  for  the  Navy,  paying  the  seamen  was 
the  last  fulfilled.  His  pay  was  always  in  arrear.  Mr. 
Grenville,  on  the  24th  January  1 758,  introduced  a  Bill 
establishing  a  regular  method  for  the  punctual,  speedy, 
and  certain  payment  of  the  seamen's  wages,  and  for 
enabling  them  more  easily  and  readily  to  remit  the 
same  for  the  support  of  their  wives  and  families. 

The  Habeas  Corpus  Act  of  Charles  11.  applied  only 
to  persons  under  detention  for  an  alleged  criminal 
offence.  A  husband  might  lock  up  his  wife  in  a  room  in 
his  house  ;  angry  relatives  might  confine  a  troublesome 
old  man  or  old  woman  without  any  proper  Lunacy 
authority  sanctioning  the  detention.  It  was  proposed 
to  apply  the  Protection  of  Habeas  Corpus  to  persons 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  f.  329. 


238 


MATTHEW  HUTTON  [i757- 


other  than  those  arrested  on  criminal  charges,  and  to 
extend  the  power  to  order  the  writ  in  vacation. 

The  House  of  Commons  was  mider  Pitt's  leadership, 
though  he  seems  to  have  been  busier  with  the  war  than 
with  legislation.  However,  the  two  Bills  passed  the 
Commons.  Horace  Walpole  says  :  "  A  Navy  Bill  of  Mr. 
Geo.  Grenville  rejected  last  year  by  the  Lords  and 
passed  again  by  us  has  by  Mr.  Fox's  underhand  manage- 
ment been  made  an  affair  by  the  Lords  ;  yet  it  will 
pass.  The  extension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus  of  forty 
times  the  consequence  is  impeded  by  the  same  dealings 
and  is  not  likety  to  have  so  prosperous  an  issue."  ^  The 
Lords  did  not  much  favour  the  Bills  ;  certainly  New- 
castle and  Hardwicke  did  not  like  the  suggested  amend- 
ment of  the  Habeas  Corpus  or  the  way  Pratt  had 
brought  it  in. 

On  Saturday,  the  iith  March  1758,  Newcastle  sends 
a  memo  to  the  archbishop.  "  I  lay  before  your  Grace," 
he  says,  "  Lord  Hardwicke 's  sentiments  and  my  own 
upon  the  conduct  we  should  hold  upon  the  Bill  now 
depending  for  payment  of  seamen's  wages."  After 
saying  they  would  not  have  any  change  in  Habeas 
Corpus,  he  goes  on  :  "  If  your  Grace  does  us  the  honour 
to  agree  with  us  in  our  opinion,  I  should  submit  it  to  your 
Grace  whether  it  might  not  be  proper  for  you  to  give 
notice  to  the  bishops,  such,  I  mean,  as  your  Grace  usually 
sends  to,  to  attend  the  House  on  Thursday  next  when 
the  Navy  Bill  comes  on.  Let  your  Friends  upon  the 
Bench  know  your  thoughts  upon  the  two  Bills — Navy 
Bill  and  Habeas  Corpus."  ^ 

Hutton  had  had  two  attacks  of  the  gout  in  the  course 
of  the  winter,  but  is  said  to  have  been  for  some  time 
before  his  death  remarkably  well.  He  duly  obeyed 
Ministers'  directions  about  attending  Parliament.  On 
the  1 6th  March  1758  he  heard  a  sermon  before  the 
Governors  of  the  London  Hospital,  from  thence  he  went 

*  Letters  by  Toynbee,  iv.  128. 

2  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32878,  f.  177. 


1758]       SHORT  ILLNESS  AND  DEATH 


to  the  House  of  Lords,  where  he  stayed  till  nearly  nine. 
He  supped  heartily  and  rested  well,  and  went  the  next 
day,  Friday,  17th  March,  to  the  House  of  Lords,  where 
he  stayed  till  past  eight  at  night.  Hardwicke,  from  his 
letter  quoted  in  Seeker's  Life,  thought  his  fatal  illness 
was  not  unconnected  with  his  zeal  in  Parliament.  The 
Navy  Bill  was  debated  on  the  Thursday  and  Friday. 
It  was  ultimately  passed  after  the  Lords  had  summoned 
some  of  the  Commons  and  examined  them  as  experts 
on  its  provisions.  The  Habeas  Corpus  Bill  was  not 
discussed  till  May  in  the  Lords,  when  it  was  thrown 
out,  the  Judges  being  instructed  to  prepare  a  Bill  on 
the  subject  for  next  Session.  When  the  archbishop 
retired  on  the  Friday  evening  he  complained  of  being 
fatigued.  The  next  morning  early  he  was  taken 
extremely  ill  with  an  inflammation  of  the  bowels, 
occasioned  most  probably  by  an  old  rupture  from 
which  he  had  long  suffered.  All  possible  methods 
were  used  to  save  his  life  ;  but  he  grew  worse  in  the 
evening,  and  continued  so  all  the  next  day  till  towards 
ten  on  Sunday  night,  when  he  expired  at  his  house, 
Duke  Street,  Westminster. 

He  had  always  wished  to  be  buried  quietly  either 
at  Croydon  or  Lambeth,  and  his  widow  and  two 
daughters,  whom  he  appointed  his  executrices,  caused 
his  body  to  be  brought  to  Lambeth  Palace,  and  he  was 
buried  privately  in  the  Chancel  of  Lambeth  Church 
on  Easter  Monday,  27th  March,  in  the  evening  between 
nine  and  ten.  He  lies  in  a  vault  near  the  altar,  with 
the  following  inscription  on  a  marble  stone  : 

H  S  E 

Reverendissimus  in  Christo  Pater 
MATTHOEUS  HUTTON  S  T  P 
Cantuariensis  Archiepiscopus 
Ob  19  Mart.  A  D  1758 
OEtat  65. 

A  handsome  monument  of  a  pyramidal  form  in 


240 


MATTHEW  HUTTON  [i757- 


white  and  veined  marble,  with  a  large  urn  at  the  top, 
is  thus  inscribed  : 

Infra  conduntur  reliquioe 
MATTHAEI  HUTTON  S  T  P 
Episcopi  Bangoriensis  A  D  1743 
Deinde  Archiepiscopi  Eboracensis  1747 
tandem  Cantuariensis  1757 
qui  obiit  19  Martii  AD  1758 
oetat  65 
Et  Marioe  uxoris  ejus 
quoe  obiit  13  Maii  AD  1779 
oetatis  suoe  86 
duabus  relictis  filiis 
quoe  pietatis  ergo  monumentum 
hoc  utrique  Parenti  posuerunt 
A  D  1781. 

Hutton's  mother  came  from  Sussex,  and  he  sought 
his  wife  from  the  same  county,  he  having  married,  in 
1732  while  Rector  of  Spofforth,  Marj',  daughter  of 
Mr.  Lutman  of  Pet  worth,  by  whom  he  left,  as  the  monu- 
ment records,  two  daughters. 

His  widow,  according  to  the  monument,  survived 
him  nearly  twenty  years. 

Hutton's  Primacy  was  of  course  so  brief  that  this 
alone  would  have  prevented  him  making  a  great  mark 
as  archbishop.  The  Wesleys  were  stirring,  but,  apart 
from  them,  Church  and  State  were  in  George  the 
Second's  closing  years  somewhat  torpid.  Horace 
Walpole  writes  to  Sir  Horace  Mann  on  the  21st  March 
1758:  "Our  new  Archbishop  died  yesterday;  but 
the  Church  loses  its  head  with  as  little  noise  as  a  ques- 
tion is  now  carried  or  lost  in  Parliament."^  Two  days 
later  he  writes  to  his  friend  Charles  Lyttelton,  then  Dean 
of  Exeter,  an  ancestor  of  the  distinguished  family  of 
Lyttelton  of  to-day,  and  a  great  antiquary  : 

"  Well,  there  is  another  archbishop  dead.  Will 
none  of  their  deaths  operate  to  your  Deanery.  It  is 
believed  that  St.  Durham  goes  to  Canterbury,  and  St. 
Asaph  to  follow  him.    I  don't  fancy  St.  Asaph  for  you." 

*  Letters,  iv.  128. 


1758] 


CHARACTER 


Walpole's  prognostications  were  wrong.  Seeker, 
as  we  know,  went  from  Oxford  to  Canterbury.  The 
Hon.  Robert  Drummond  went  three  years  later  to 
York.^  Lyttelton  himself  was  made  Bishop  of  Carlisle 
in  1 76 1. 

About  half  a  dozen  of  Hutton's  sermons  were  pub- 
lished. One  preached  before  the  House  of  Commons  on 
30th  January  1741,  while  he  was  Prebendary  of  West- 
minster and  Royal  Chaplain ;  one  preached  before 
the  Lord  Mayor  and  governors  of  the  hospitals  of  the 
City  of  London  at  Easter,  1 744  ;  one  in  aid  of  promoting 
English  Protestant  working  schools  in  Ireland,  at  St. 
Mary-le-Bow  on  the  28th  March  1745;  two  before  the 
House  of  Lords  in  1744  and  1746,  and  one  before  the 
S.P.G.  in  1746.  All  these  last  were  preached  while  he 
was  Bishop  of  Bangor.  Dr.  Andrew  Coltee  Ducarel, 
who,  at  the  request  of  the  archbishop's  brother,  John 
Hutton  of  Marske,  compiled  some  incomplete  memoirs 
of  the  archbishop,  seems  from  Nichols'  Illustrations  of 
Literature,  iii.  466,  to  have  been  responsible  for  the 
following  statement  :  "This  great  prelate  had  a  very 
extensive  knowledge  of  men  and  things,  was  endowed 
with  very  quick  parts,  and  blessed  with  a  tenacious 
memory.  He  was  an  excellent  scholar,  whose  learning 
was  well  digested,  and  a  polite  and  elegant  writer." 
Ducarel  with  becoming  deference  declines  to  add  to 
his  memoir  any  character  of  his  Grace.  He  says  that 
his  picture  may  give  posterity  some  idea  of  his  person, 
but  would  never  be  able  to  convey  with  it  either  the 
sweetness  of  his  countenance  or  his  many  excellent 
qualities.  "  His  abilities  were,"  he  says,  "  very  great 
and  known  to  be  so,"  and  he  adds,  "  I  believe  few  of 
his  predecessors  were  better  qualified  for  the  high  and 
important  stations  to  which  it  pleased  Providence  to 
advance  him."  He  adopts  the  account  of  the  arch- 
bishop from  the  Gazette  of  21st  March  1758  as  being 
strictly  true  in  all  respects  :  "  He  is  a  gentleman  of 

*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  313. 


242 


MATTHEW  HUTTON  [i7S7- 


sound  learning,  clear  understanding,  of  great  humanity 
and  politeness  and  easy  access  to  all  who  had  any 
occasion  to  apply  to  his  Grace  either  on  business  or 
advice,  and  his  loss  is  most  regretted  by  those  who 
knew  him  best." 

We  have  another  and  fuller  description  of  Arch- 
bishop Hutton  by  Dr.  Thomas  Wray  in  a  letter  to  Dr. 
Ducarel,  dated  the  2nd  September  1758.  Hutton  had 
been  Wray's  patron,  having  appointed  him  his  chaplain. 
The  portrait  is  for  this  reason,  like  the  characters  we 
have  already  given,  not  very  analytical  and  profusely 
laudatory,  reading  almost  like  a  modern  testimonial.^ 

"As  you  desire  my  sentiments  of  the  late  arch- 
bishop, and  I  cannot  well  defer  any  longer  sending  them, 
I  shall  give  you  them  now,  though  I  could  wish  to  have 
had  a  little  more  leisure  for  recollection.  During  the 
time  I  had  the  honour  to  be  in  his  Grace's  family,  which 
was  about  a  year  and  a  half,  the  amiable  qualities  and 
accomplishments  that  rendered  him  the  agreeable  com- 
panion in  so  extraordinary  a  manner  and  enabled  him 
to  appear  with  so  much  advantage  abroad  in  all  com- 
panies, showed  themselves  also  at  home  where  his 
behaviour  was  always  polite  and  gentlemanlike. 
Though  he  was  always  very  cheerful,  chatty,  and  face- 
tious, he  had  a  particular  regard  for  decorum  ;  he  never 
forgot  the  ro  ^ps-rof;  he  never  let  himself  down  below 
the  dignity  of  the  Archbishop.  I  need  not  tell  you 
that  he  was  very  happy  in  being  able  to  attract  your 
love  and  esteem  while  he  was  commanding  reverence. 
He  was  happy  also  in  enjoying  a  regular  and  constant 
flow  of  spirits  notwithstanding  the  infirmities  of  his 
constitution — so  constant  a  one  that  I  have  heard  him 
say  that  he  could  not  recollect  the  time  when  he  wanted 
any.  He  was  an  affectionate  husband,  a  very  tender- 
hearted parent,  and  a  kind  master.  How  sincere  he  was 
in  his  professions  of  friendship  those  that  he  admitted  to 
any  degree  of  intimacy  will  declare.  It  will  be  needless  to 
mention  that  he  wanted  not  abilities  to  make  a  con- 
siderable figure  in  the  high  station  he  filled,  when  his 
health  would  permit  him  to  exert  them  ;  that  he  was 
very  ready  in  the  despatch  of  business  ;  that,  as  I  fancy 

*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  473. 


1758] 


A  YORKSHI REMAN 


243 


none  of  his  predecessors  excelled  him  in  a  graceful  and 
majestic  mien,  few  had  a  clearer  head  or  could  com- 
municate their  thoughts  with  more  readiness  or  greater 
perspicuity.  He  had  a  very  extensive  knowledge  of 
men  and  things,  and  his  knowledge  of  books  was  very 
well  digested.  He  was  a  person  of  very  quick  parts 
and  had  a  tenacious  memory. 

"  His  being  a  little  ad  rem  attentior,  I  attribute 
entirely  to  his  having  a  family,  as  I  have  not  heard  that 
he  ever  discovered  such  a  turn  in  his  younger  days  ; 
and  I  believe  he  was  above  doing  anything  little,  mean, 
or  dirty." 

The  chaplain's  account  of  his  patron,  flattering  as 
we  should  expect  it  to  be,  gives  us  one  or  two  hints  from 
which  we  can  make  our  picture  of  the  archbishop  better. 
There  is  certainly  some  delicacy  of  health,  since  this  is 
twice  mentioned  in  the  letter.  Some  overcarefulness 
about  money  there  must  have  been,  or  Wray  would  not 
have  called  him  a  little  ad  rem  attentior  ;  and  as  Hutton's 
family  consisted  only  of  two  daughters,  the  chaplain's 
excuse  for  this  failing  seems  hardly  made  out. 

Archbishop  Hutton  came  of  a  good  old  Yorkshire 
family,  and  he  had  at  least  one  ancestor,  his  namesake 
and  predecessor  in  the  See  of  York,  to  be  proud  of,  and 
he  was  careful,  like  other  archbishops,  of  his  family  and 
pedigree.  Dr.  Ducarel  had  shortly  before  the  arch- 
bishop's death  completed  a  pedigree  of  the  Huttons 
of  Marske,  and  had  received  certain  corrections  in  it, 
as  he  says,  from  Hutton's  own  mouth.  The  archbishop 
and  his  brother  thought  that  their  archiepiscopal  an- 
cestor or  his  family  should  be  cleared  from  an  aspersion 
thrown  by  Dr.  Drake  in  his  Lives  of  the  Archbishops  of 
York.  The  work  was  continued  by  Dr.  Ducarel,  after 
our  archbishop's  death,  for  his  brother. 

But  little  of  Hutton's  correspondence  has  been 
preserved ;  not  enough,  nor  was  his  tenure  of  the 
Primacy  enough  to  give  us  a  real  insight  into  his 
character  and  personality.  Two  or  three  letters  to 
Ducarel  are   preserved    in    Nichols'    Illustrations  of 


244 


MATTHEW  HUTTON  [1757- 


Literature.  These  show  him  to  have  been  interested 
in  and  a  careful  guardian  of  the  Lambeth  Library. 

"  Croydon  House,  2?>th  August  17^7- 
"  Sir, — I  am  glad  to  hear  that  the  Register  Books 
of  this  see  are  removed  and  placed  to  yr  mind  in  the 
Librar^^  It  will  be  an  additional  pleasure  to  hear  you 
have  succeeded  in  your  application  to  St.  John's  College 
for  Laud's  Diary.  If  the  President  perseveres  in  his 
silence,  the  best  advice  I  can  think  of  will  be  to  get 
some  friend  to  wait  on  him  to  know  whether  your  letter 
was  received  ;  whether  he  acknowledges  the  possession 
of  the  Diary  ;  and  if  so,  to  signify  to  the  President  and 
the  College  that  the  Archbishop  would  take  it  for  a 
singular  favour  if  they  would  allow  it  to  be  replaced 
in  the  Library  at  Lambeth,  to  which  it  appears  formerly 
to  have  belonged.  We  shall  know  by  the  answers  what 
further  step  it  may  be  prudent  to  take  in  order  to 
recover  the  MSS. — I  am  your  affecte  friend  and  servant, 

"  Matt.  Cantuar." 

"  Croydon,  30/A  September  1757. 
"  Sir, — My  thanks  are  due  to  you  for  two  Letters  and 
for  the  two  volumes  of  the  Indices  and  Archbishop's 
Registers,  etc.,  which  came  safe  to  me  yesterday. 

"  I  very  seldom  dine  from  home  on  a  Sunday  ;  and 
if  on  Sunday  next  about  two  o'clock  you  will  give  me 
your  company  it  will  be  very  acceptable  to, — Your 
affectionate  friend  and  servant, 

"  Matt.  Cantuar." 

Judging  from  the  Parliamentary  Reports,  Hutton 
was  entirely  without  ambitions  as  a  Parliamentary 
orator.  He  had  little  opportunity  during  his  one  year 
as  Primate  ;  and  as  Archbishop  of  York  he  was  silent 
in  the  House  of  Lords,  even  when  Canterbury  was  away 
through  illness.  When  in  1754  Ministers  wished  to 
repeal  the  Jews  Naturalisation  Act  they  had  passed 
the  year  before,  and  sought  help  from  the  Episcopal 
Bench  in  doing  so,  it  was  Seeker,  as  we  shall  see,  who 
seconded  the  ministerial  motion  for  the  Repealing  Bill. 

Hutton  is  generally  stated  to  have  been  Latitudin- 


1758]       ARCHDEACON  BLACKBURNE  245 


arian  in  his  opinions.  Politically  he  was  without  doubt 
a  Whig,  free  from  any  taint  of  Jacobitism,  a  convinced 
upholder  of  the  Protestant  succession — with  no  sym- 
pathy with  the  principles  of  divine  right  or  passive 
obedience — the  friend  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  of  Pelham, 
and  of  Newcastle,  the  opponent  of  the  Non-jurors  in 
England  as  well  as  in  Scotland. 

Hutton's  patronage  of  Blackburne,  whom  he,  while 
at  York,  appointed  to  act  as  one  of  his  chaplains,  and 
whom  he  afterwards  made  Archdeacon  of  Cleveland  and 
Prebendary  of  Bilton  in  York,  is  one  of  the  best  avail- 
able pieces  of  evidence  of  his  Church  views.  Blackburne 
was  throughout  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century 
a  leader  of  what  would  now  be  called  the  extreme 
Broad  Church  Party.  He  was  educated  at  Catharine 
Hall,  Cambridge,  but  owing  to  his  political  principles 
could  not  get  a  foundation  fellowship  at  his  college, 
and  went  to  reside  in  Yorkshire.  He  was  a  native  of 
Richmond  in  that  county,  and,  as  Hutton's  family 
lived  at  Marske  only  a  few  miles  off,  the  future  arch- 
bishop knew  him  personally  and  his  character  with 
his  neighbours.  Blackburne  was  also  recommended 
to  Hutton  while  Bishop  of  Bangor  by  his  friend  John 
Yorke.  By  the  time  Herring's  primacy  closed,  some- 
what of  a  change  had  come  over  English  Church 
Latitudinarianism.  The  first  half  of  the  eighteenth 
century  had  seen  the  era  of  Clarke,  Rector  of  St.  James', 
and  the  eccentric  Whiston.  Clarke  was  a  favourite 
of  Queen  Caroline,  and  was  a  man  of  high  principle, 
but  he  had  been  unsettled  in  his  views  about  the  Divine 
nature,  and  particularly  about  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity.  He  had  in  1719  published  a  Reformed  Common 
Prayer  Book,  in  which  he  had  altered  the  Doxology  to  an 
Arian  form.  Against  this  Robinson,  Bishop  of  London, 
had  solemnly  protested,  though  even  the  S.P.C.K. 
seems  to  have  patronised  unsuspiciously  some  of  the 
Clarke  publications.  There  seem,  in  fact,  to  have  been 
three  main  heads  or  points  in  the  Broad  Churchmanship 


246 


MATTHEW  HUTTON  [1757- 


of  the  day  :  (i)  Latitude  in  interpretation  of  the  Church's 
formularies.  This  was  the  basis  of  what  was  known  as 
Arian  subscription.  "  A  man,"  said  Clarke,  "  could 
honestly  use  the  formula  of  the  Prayer  Book  and  yet  hold 
Arian  or  semi-Arian  opinions  as  to  the  nature  of  our 
Lord."  (2)  Alteration  of  the  Church's  formularies.  The 
w^ork  on  Spirit,  brought  out  in  1750  by  Clayton,  Bishop 
of  Clogher,  though  written  by  a  young  clergyman  of  his 
diocese,  advocated  revision  of  the  Prayer  Book  with  its 
doctrinal  statements  as  to  the  Trinity,  and  in  1756 
Clayton  moved  in  the  Irish  House  of  Lords  the  omission 
of  the  Nicene  and  Athanasian  Creeds.  (3)  Freedom 
of  the  clergy  from  subscription.  It  was  on  the  first 
point  that  Clarke  was  strongest ;  every  person,  said  he, 
might  reasonably  agree  to  forms  imposed  by  Protestant 
communions  whenever  he  can  in  any  sense  at  all 
reconcile  them  with  Scripture.  Clarke  died  in  1729, 
and  Waterland  in  1740.  Five  or  six  years  later  came 
the  new  phase  ;  in  1746,  Jones  of  Alconbury,  a  well- 
meaning  man  and  no  heretic,  published  his  Free  and 
Candid  Disquisitions  relating  to  the  Church  of  England — 
a  collection  of  essay's  suggesting  reforms  in  the  Church 
of  England.  It  was  this  book  which  first  led  Blackburne 
to  publish  any  controversial  work.  By  the  advice  of 
Dr.  E.  Law,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  a  man  of 
sound  piety,  Jones  submitted  his  MSS  to  Blackburne, 
who  was  a  friend  of  Law.  But  it  did  not  go  far  enough 
for  Blackburne,  who  thought  it  too  milky,  and  wished 
those  in  power  in  the  Church  to  be  addressed  more 
sharply  and  sternly.  Jones,  however,  met  with  many 
antagonists  among  the  Higher  Churchmen,  principal 
among  wliich  was  one  Bosworth,  who  published 
remarks  on  the  Disquisitions ;  as  an  answer  to 
Bosworth,  Blackburne  took  the  field  with  an  "  apology  " 
for  them.  In  July  1750,  Hutton  gave  Blackburne  his 
archdeaconry^  and  prebend.  Blackburne  asserted  that 
Hutton  knew  his  opinions,  that  when  he  w^ent  to  Bishop- 
thorpe  to  be  collated  to  the  archdeaconry,  and  was 


MaTTFIEW  IIut'TON 

[  To  face  p.  2^6 


1758] 


BLACKBURNE 


247 


shown  into  the  chaplain's  room,  the  first  thing  he  saw 
lying  on  the  table  was  his  Apology,  and  says  that  he 
was  not  a  "  stranger  to  the  Archbishop's  liberal  notions 
on  ecclesiastical  affairs."  Blackburne  himself  felt 
difficulty  about  strained  or  unnatural  subscription,  and 
thought  the  condition  and  work  of  the  clergy  would  be 
improved  by  their  being  freed  from  subscription,  and  if 
some  alterations  in  the  formularies  were  made.  In  1 754 
he  published  a  letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  in 
which  he  finds  much  fault  with  the  clergy.  It  consists, 
excepting  a  very  inconsiderable  number,  of  "  men  whose 
lives  and  ordinary  occupations  are  most  foreign  to  their 
profession."  There  is  the  ignorant  herd  of  poor  curates 
and  "  the  most  ignorant  common  people  that  are  in  any 
Protestant,  if  not  in  any  Christian,  society."  He  con- 
tinued his  activity ;  his  sermon  on  Christmas  Day,  1753, 
raising  further  objections  to  such  things  as  Church 
Festivals,  which  he  put  as  in  the  nature  of  "  beggarly 
elements."  But  there  was  a  thread  of  sincereness  about 
his  plansfor  Church  Reform  which  makes  his  unsoundness 
the  more  to  be  regretted.  He  angered  Seeker — partly 
by  saying  that  Butler  died  a  Roman — but  he  had  sym- 
pathisers at  Cambridge  —  Law,  Paley,  and  Watson, 
afterwards  Bishop  of  Llandaff  ;  Jebb,  and  even  Bishop 
Lowth,  were  his  friends.  In  1766  came  out  his  "magnum 
opus"  TheConfessional ,  though  anonymously, in  which  he 
questioned  the  right  of  a  Church,  calling  itself  Protestant, 
to  require  its  ministers  to  subscribe  to  its  formularies. 
But  this  work,  which  met  with  stern  opposition  from 
Seeker,  Hutton's  successor  at  Canterbury,  was  not 
published  till  some  years  after  Hutton's  death.  Black- 
burne continued  his  efforts  in  favour  of  relaxation 
of  subscription  for  some  years,  though  he  repudiated 
when  the  suggestion  was  made  any  sympathy  with 
Arian  or  Socinian  opinions.  But  the  fair  result  of 
his  patronage  of  Blackburne  is  that  Hutton's  own 
opinions  in  Church  matters  were  Latitudinarian  in 
character. 
17 


THOMAS  SECKER 


1758-1768 

Thomas  Secker,  Hutton's  successor  in  the  Primacy, 
was  born  in  1693  a  small  village  called  Sibthorp  or 
Sibthorpe,  near  Newark,  in  the  vale  of  Belvoir,  in  the 
county  of  Nottingham.  His  father  was  a  Dissenter. 
Bishop  Porteous  speaks  of  him  as  a  "  pious,  virtuous, 
and  sensible  man."  Having  a  small  patrimony  of  his 
own  he  had  no  profession  or  trade.  The  future  arch- 
bishop's mother  was  the  daughter  of  Mr.  George  Brough 
of  Shelton,  in  the  county  of  Nottingham,  a  substantial 
gentleman  farmer.  Young  Secker  was  sent  to  school 
first  at  Chesterfield,  in  Derbyshire.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  from  the  first  he  was  a  very  promising 
pupil.  When  industry  and  ability  join  forces  they 
are  hard  to  beat,  and  Secker  had  a  good  stock  of  both. 
Mr.  Brown,  his  pedagogue  at  Chesterfield,  if  the 
anecdote  told  in  the  Gentleman's  Magazine  for  1768  be 
true,  was  a  Churchman  ;  for  the  boy  having  done  well 
in  his  classical  exercises,  his  master  patted  him  on  the 
head  and  said,  "  Secker,  if  thou  wouldst  but  come  over 
to  the  Church,  I  am  sure  thou  wouldst  be  a  bishop." 
When  archbishop  he  is  said  to  have  given  his  old 
master's  son,  a  worthy  clergyman  with  a  long  family 
and  a  short  income,  a  living  in  Yorkshire.  Whether 
Mr.  Brown  died  or  retired  we  cannot  say,  but  in  1708 
young  Secker  was  moved  to  a  Dissenting  Academy  at 
Attercliffe,  near  Sheffield  ;  but  his  stay  here  was  short, 
for  in  about  a  year's  time  he  was  moved  to  Gloucester- 
shire to  a  school  at  Gloucester,  afterwards  shifted  to 

248 


I758-I768] 


HIS  MASTER 


249 


Tewkesbury.  This  school  seems  to  have  been  kept  by 
one  Warner,  afterwards  by  a  Mr.  Jones. 

There  is  a  very  interesting  letter  from  Seeker  to  the 
great  hymn-writer,  Dr.  Watts,  published  in  Dr.  Watts' 
life  and  dated  the  i8th  November  171 1,  giving  an 
account  of  the  life  at  Mr.  Jones'  academy,  from  which 
it  may  be  gathered  that  it  was  to  Dr.  Watts  that  Seeker 
owed  his  introduction  to  Mr.  Jones.  Jones  had  been 
ejected  from  a  living  in  Wales,  and  doubtless  enjoyed  a 
high  reputation  among  the  Nonconformists.  The  letter 
says  : 

"  Jones  I  take  to  be  a  man  of  real  piety,  great 
learning,  and  an  agreeable  temper,  one  who  is  very 
diligent  in  instructing  all  under  his  care,  very  well 
qualified  to  give  instructions,  and  whose  well-managed 
familiarity  will  always  make  him  respected.  He 
is  very  strict  in  keeping  order,  and  will  effectually 
preserve  his  pupils  from  negligence  and  immorality  ; 
not  many  academies  are  freer  from  those  vices  than  we 
are.  .  .  .  Hebrew  and  Logic  are  our  morning's  work. 
We  are  obliged  to  rise  at  five  o'clock  every  morning, 
and  to  speak  Latin  always  except  when  below  stairs 
among  the  family.  The  greatest  inconvenience  that 
we  suffer  is  that  we  fill  the  house  rather  too  much, 
being  sixteen  in  number  besides  Mr.  Jones.  I  suppose 
the  increase  of  his  academy  will  oblige  him  to  move 
next  spring.  We  pass  our  time  very  agreeably  betwixt 
study  and  conversation  with  our  tutor,  who  is  always 
ready  to  discourse  freely  of  anything  that  is  useful,  and 
allows  us  either  then  or  at  lecture  all  imaginable  liberty 
of  making  objections  against  his  opinion  and  prosecut- 
ing them  as  far  as  we  can."  ^ 

At  this  school  came  about  one  of  the  turning-points 
of  Seeker's  life  ;  for  among  his  fellow-scholars  was 
Joseph  Butler,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Durham  and  author 
of  the  celebrated  Analogy.  The  two  boys  were  alike 
in  their  love  of  study,  in  industry,  and  in  intellectual 
ability,  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  a  close  friendship 
sprang  up  between  them,  which  continued  throughout 

'  Memoirs  of  Isaac  Watts,  byiT.  Gibbons,  p.  10. 


250 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[I7S8- 


their  lives.  At  Mr.  Jones'  school  at  Tewkesbury  he  is 
said  to  have  had  also  as  a  schoolfellow,  and  even  as  a 
chamber-fellow,  the  eminent  Nonconformist  divine, 
Mr.  Chandler.  It  was  while  still  at  Tewkesbury  that 
Butler  got  into  correspondence  with  Dr.  Samuel  Clarke 
over  his  work  called  A  Demonstration  of  the  Being 
and  Attributes  of  God  ;  young  Butler  in  a  letter  put 
before  Dr.  Clarke  some  reasons  against  the  soundness  of 
certain  of  Clarke's  arguments. ^  These  were  so  properly 
expressed  that  Clarke  considered  and  replied  to  the 
points  of  the  youthful  critic,  though  personally  a 
stranger  to  him  ;  a  friendship  sprang  up  between  them, 
and  the  letters  were  afterwards  printed  at  the  end  of 
Clarke's  Evidences  of  Natural  and  Revealed  Religions. 
Seeker  was  privy  to  the  interesting  correspondence;  in 
fact,  to  him  was  committed  in  confidence  the  task  of 
taking  his  friend's  letters  to  the  post  office  at  Gloucester 
and  bringing  back  Dr.  Clarke's  replies.  It  is  a  mis- 
fortune for  any  boy  to  have  his  school  often  changed, 
but  Seeker  mastered  the  misfortune,  and  the  list  of  his 
attainments  by  the  age  of  nineteen  is  almost  staggering. 
He  had  by  that  age,  we  are  told,  read  the  best  and 
most  difficult  writers  in  Greek  and  Latin,  acquired  a 
knowledge  of  French,  Hebrew,  Chaldee,  and  Syriac,  had 
learned  geography,  logic,  algebra,  geometry,  conic 
sections,  and  gone  through  a  course  of  lectures  on 
Jewish  antiquities  preparatory  to  the  critical  study  of 
the  Bible. 

To  the  eye  of  his  father  the  young  Seeker  was  in 
every  way  fitted  for  the  Nonconformist  Ministry,  and 
for  eminence  and  usefulness  in  it,  and,  whatever  he 
had  studied  before,  between  nineteen  and  twenty-three 
he  "  read  "  almost  exclusively  Divinity.  The  Greek 
Testament,  Eusebius'  History,  Whiston's  Primitive 
Christianity ,  and  other  theological  works  were  read 
and  re-read  ;  nor  is  it  to  be  wondered  at  that  the 
issues  between  Church  and  Nonconformity  and  the 
*  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  iii.  748. 


1768] 


PARIS 


251 


writers  thereon  were  the  subjects  of  careful  study.  The 
result,  if  Bishop  Porteous  is  to  be  believed,  is  equally  not 
to  be  wondered  at :  such  a  process  and  its  sequel  have 
ever  since  been  repeated,  and  are  now  repeated  every 
day  with  the  sons  of  many  an  English  home,  clerical 
and  lay.  In  the  main,  as  a  result  of  his  studies,  young 
Seeker  was  prepared  to  accept  fully  the  Christian 
faith,  though  on  some  abstruse  and  speculative  doctrines 
his  views  remained  uncrystallised  and  nebulous.  On 
the  controversies  between  Church  and  Dissent  his  mind 
was  not  fully  made  up.  According  to  Mr.  Jones,  as 
cited  by  Nichols,^  while  a  young  man,  he  preached  to  a 
small  Dissenting  congregation  in  Derbyshire,  but  was 
"  thought  by  the  more  elderly  and  grave  people  there 
to  be  rather  too  young  and  airy  for  such  a  charge." 
He,  however,  resolved,  as  Bishop  Porteous  says,  like  a 
wise  and  honest  man,  "  to  pursue  some  profession  which 
should  leave  him  at  liberty  to  weigh  these  things  more 
maturely  in  his  thoughts,  and  not  oblige  him  to  declare 
or  teach  publicly  opinions  which  were  not  yet  thoroughly 
settled  in  his  own  mind."  Accordingly,  about  the  end 
of  1 716,  he  began  to  study  physic,  and  for  this  purpose 
he  came  to  London,  where  he  read  science  and  attended 
lectures  for  two  years.  In  January  1 718-19,  to  improve 
himself  still  more,  he  went  to  Paris.  Here  he  certainly 
seems  to  have  given  himself  the  best  chance  possible. 
He  lodged  at  Cloitre  St.  Benoit  Rue  des  Mathurins  in 
the  same  house  with  Mr.  Winslow,  the  famous  anato- 
mist, whose  lectures  he  attended.  Surgical  operations 
at  the  Hotel  Dieu,  lectures  on  Materia  Medica,  Chemistry 
and  Botany  at  the  King's  Gardens  were  followed  with 
careful  regularity  ;  and  he  also  attended  for  some  time 
M.  Gregoire,  the  famous  accoucheur.  While  at  Paris 
also  young  Seeker  made  some  good  friendships.  Among 
other  persons  of  learning  and  eminence,  he  became 
acquainted  with  Albinus,  afterwards  Professor  at  Leyden, 
and  Father  Montfaucon  ;   and  here  too  he  first  knew 

*  Literary  Anecdotes,  iii.  748. 


252 


THOMAS  SECKER  [1758- 


his  future  brother-in-law,  Martin  Benson,  afterwards 
Bishop  of  Gloucester,  a  man  of  high  character  and  great 
personal  charm,  with  whom  much  of  Seeker's  after  life 
was  so  intimately  connected. 

The  zealous  student  of  medicine  seems,  while  in 
Paris,  to  have  retained  his  affection  for  his  first  love, 
and  to  have  continued  more  or  less  his  divinity  studies. 
But  much  more  important,  he  retained  quite  unimpaired 
his  intimate  friendship  with  Joseph  Butler,  and  constant 
correspondence  passed  between  them.  Butler  by  this 
time  had  taken  Orders,  having  been  ordained  Deacon 
in  October,  and  Priest  in  December  171 8  by  William 
Talbot,  then  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  afterwards  Bishop  of 
Durham.  Bishop  Talbot  seems  to  have  been  a  man 
of  genuine  goodness,  though  he  has  been  charged  with 
avarice.^  One  of  his  sons  was  Charles  Talbot,  who  was 
Solicitor-General,  and  afterwards  succeeded  Lord  King 
as  Lord  Chancellor.  The  bishop  had  another  son, 
Edward,  who  intended  to  take  Orders,  and  of  whom 
the  highest  expectations  were  formed  by  his  friends. 
He,  like  Seeker,  was  an  intimate  friend  of  Joseph 
Butler,  but  it  does  not  appear  that,  prior  to  his  return 
from  Paris,  Seeker  had  ever  met  Edward  Talbot.  The 
latter  had  influence  not  only  in  ecclesiastical  circles 
as  his  father's  son,  but  through  his  brother  with  the 
lawyers  ;  and  about  this  time  Joseph  Butler  was  ap- 
pointed on  his  recommendation,  backed  up  by  those 
of  Butler's  old  correspondent.  Dr.  Clarke,  Preacher  of 
the  Rolls  ;  the  appointment  being  made  by  Sir  Joseph 
Jekyll. 

Butler  had  firmly  impressed  on  his  mind  the  merits 
of  his  friend  in  Paris,  and,  unknown  to  Seeker,  in  the 
course  of  conversation  with  his  friend,  Edward  Talbot, 
mentioned  him  in  such  a  way  as  to  arouse  the  friendly 
interest  of  Talbot.  The  interests  of  religion  and  of  the 
English  Church  in  particular  were  very  near  young 
Talbot's  heart,  and  we  can  well  understand  how  the  idea 

*  Hore,  i.  449. 


1768]  INCLINED  TO  ORDERS  253 


took  hold  of  him  that  Seeker  was  a  man  who  should  be 
secured  for  the  sacred  calling.  Whether  Edward  Talbot 
talked  the  matter  over  with  his  father  or  not,  we  cannot 
say.  The  elder  Talbot  was  no  unworthy  bishop,  and  the 
close  intimacy  between  him  and  a  son  minded  as  Edward 
Talbot  was  can  be  easily  surmised.  In  the  result 
Edward  Talbot  felt  himself  justified  in  promising,  and 
did  promise  Butler  that  if  Seeker  took  Orders  in 
the  Church  his  father  would  provide  for  him.  Butler 
now,  as  ever,  a  willing  correspondent,  wrote,  in  May 
1720,  a  letter  to  Seeker  telling  him  of  Edward  Talbot's 
proposal  and  promise.  At  the  time  of  the  letter 
reaching  Seeker  he  had  not  abandoned  the  idea  of 
practising  medicine,  but  was  overwhelmed  by  the 
small  prospect  of  doing  so  with  success.  His  mind, 
according  to  Bishop  Porteous,  had  been  much  running 
on  his  old  theological  lines  ;  his  doubts  were  weaker  ; 
his  sense  of  the  internal  divisions  of  the  Noncon- 
formists— then  very  keen— more,  and  his  difficulties 
as  to  Conformity  less  acute.  So  that  the  situation 
was  very  opportune  for  the  suggestion.  For  two 
months  he  thought  the  proposal  over — and  in  the  end 
accepted  it,  and  came  over  to  England  in  the  end  of 
July  or  beginning  of  August  1720. 

Nothing  could  be  more  natural  than  that  one  of 
Seeker's  first  acts  on  reaching  England  was  to  make 
acquaintance  personally  with  Edward  Talbot  ;  and 
we  are  told  that  they  became  close  friends.  Noscitur 
a  sociis ;  and  when  we  come  to  judge  Seeker's  personal 
character  and  to  form  our  judgment  on  Horace  Walpole's 
ill-natured  sneers  at  him,  it  is  a  point  in  Seeker's  favour 
that  he  formed  one  of  a  very  interesting  group  of  young 
men  which  included  Butler,  Talbot,  and  Martin  Benson. 

About  the  same  time  Edward  Talbot  married,  with 
every  prospect  of  a  happy  and  distinguished  career 
before  him.  But  trouble  and  bitter  disappointment 
were  in  the  near  future.  We  of  the  twentieth  century 
do  not  realise — it  is  only  the  very  old  who  have  had 


254 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


the  smallest  experience  of  its  horrors — what  a  scourge 
the  smallpox  was  two  hundred  years  ago  to  every  class 
of  our  countrymen.  In  December  1720,  only  a  few 
months  after  his  marriage,  Edward  Talbot  caught  it. 
He  was  only  twenty-nine  at  the  time,  but  to  the  grief 
of  his  wife  and  friends  he  succumbed  to  the  complaint. 
He  was  able  on  his  deathbed  to  remember  his  trio 
of  friends,  Butler,  Seeker,  and  Benson,  with  whom 
he  had  hoped  to  do  good  service  for  the  Church,  and  to 
commend  them  to  his  father's  notice.  Seeker  was 
advised,  and  well  advised,  before  taking  Orders,  to  get 
an  Oxford  degree,  and  also  that  the  latter  would  be 
made  easier  by  his  first  becoming  a  Doctor  of  Physics 
of  Leyden.  Accordingly,  a  few  days  after  his  friend's 
death,  he  went  via  Rotterdam  to  Leyden,  and  on  7th 
March  1721  took  his  degree,  publishing  as  his  exercise 
on  the  occasion  a  treatise  De  Medicina  Statica,  which 
Bishop  Porteous  says  was  thought  by  the  gentlemen 
of  the  medical  profession  "  a  sensible  and  learned 
performance."  ^ 

On  the  I  St  April  1721,  Seeker  entered  himself  a 
gentleman  commoner  at  Exeter  College,  Oxford,  and 
about  twelve  months  later  was  admitted,  we  are  told, 
"  without  difficulty  in  consequence  of  the  Chancellor's 
recommendatory  letter  to  the  Convocation  "  to  the 
degree  of  B.A. 

Seeker's  life  now  for  a  time  at  any  rate  lay  in  London. 
Here  he  was  admitted  to  friendship  with  learned  and 
literary  men  :  Dr.  Clarke,  rector  of  St.  James',  was 
already  his  friend  and  they  saw  much  of  one  another  ; 
with  the  great  Bishop  Berkeley,  then  Dean,  he 
became  intimate.  But  the  household  where  Seeker 
was  perhaps  the  most  frequent  visitor  was  that  of 
the  widow  of  Edward  Talbot.  A  daughter  was  born 
to  her  five  months  after  her  husband's  death,  and  the 
baby's  sickly  health  required  every  care.  To  help  in 
providing  this,  Mrs.  Talbot  had  joined  forces  with  Miss 

'  Nicliols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  498. 


1/68]     CHAPLAIN  TO  BISHOP  TALBOT  255 


Catherine  Benson,  sister  of  Seeker's  friend,  Martin 
Benson.  They  had  been  close  companions  before  Mrs. 
Talbot's  marriage,  and  in  the  early  days  of  her  widow- 
hood the  society  of  Miss  Benson,  whose  tastes  and 
feelings  were  similar  to  her  own,  had  been  the  greatest 
support  and  comfort  to  Mrs.  Edward  Talbot.  Now 
the  two  ladies  shared  a  home  and  the  charge  of  the 
delicate  little  girl.  Seeker  was  the  intimate  friend  of 
both,  and,  as  we  shall  see  later,  towards  one  of  the 
ladies  his  feelings  became  of  an  even  tenderer 
kind. 

Bishop  Talbot  was  in  November  1721  translated  to 
Durham  ;  and  a  year  later,  in  December  1722,  Seeker 
was  ordained  Deacon  by  him  in  St.  James'  Church, 
Piccadilly.  Bishops  were  then  less  strict  than  now  in 
requiring  a  year  to  elapse  before  giving  a  deacon 
Priest's  Orders,  and  Seeker's  ordination  as  priest  by 
Bishop  Talbot  followed  in  March  1723  in  St.  James' 
Church.  Here  the  future  archbishop  preached  his 
first  sermon  on  28th  March  1723.  Bishop  Talbot 
seems  never  to  have  forgotten  his  late  son's  recom- 
mendation of  his  friends.  They  were,  we  may  well 
believe,  well  backed  up  by  what  the  bishop  personally 
saw  of  the  young  clerics.  The  bishop  had  a  domestic 
chaplain,  one  Rundle,  a  very  amusing  and  witty  talker 
— more  amusing  and  witty  apparently  than  a  bishop's 
chaplain  ought  to  be.  The  chaplain  made  enemies 
by  what  he  said,  and  produced  what  good  Bishop 
Porteous  calls  "  disagreeable  consequences."  We  can 
well  understand  that  the  good  bishop  sought  to 
neutralise  the  acid  of  Rundle's  vivacity,  by  the 
solidity  and  learning  of  Seeker.  At  any  rate  they 
went  down  to  Durham  in  July  1723  as  filling  jointly  the 
office  of  bishop's  domestic  chaplain.  The  bishop  had 
by  no  means  overlooked  his  son's  other  friends.  He, 
about  this  time,  gave  Joseph  Butler  the  Rectory  of 
Haughton,  near  Darlington,  and  gave  Martin  Benson 
a  prebend  of  Durham.    Seeker  was  within  a  year 


2S6 


THOMAS  SECKER  [i7S8- 


made  Rector  of  Houghton-le-Spring,  a  rich  living  in  the 
Bishop  of  Durham's  gift. 

Seeker  was  now  able  to  provide  a  home  for  a  wife  ; 
he  had  no  doubt  who  she  was  to  be  ;  he  proposed 
marriage  to  Catherine  Benson,  was  accepted,  and  they 
were  married  by  good  Bishop  Talbot  in  King  Street 
Chapel  in  October  1728.  But  all  parties  wished  the 
home  which  had  been  Miss  Benson's  till  her  marriage 
not  to  be  broken  up.  Mrs.  Talbot  agreed  to  bring  her 
little  girl  to  Houghton,  and  the  two  families  from  that 
time  became  one. 

Meanwhile  Joseph  Butler  was  not  altogether  happy 
at  Haughton ;  there  was  a  parsonage  house  to  be 
rebuilt,  and  Butler,  who  was  getting  ready  the  first 
edition  of  his  celebrated  Sermons,  had  no  mind  what- 
ever for  builders'  estimates  or  bricks  and  mortar,  nor 
was  the  requisite  cash  at  hand  for  so  heavy  an  expense. 
By  Seeker's  intervention,  Haughton  was  exchanged 
for  Stanhope,  a  more  valuable  benefice,  and  from 
Stanhope  shortly  afterward  the  Sermons,  and  a  little 
later  the  Immortal  Analogy — so  dear  to  Gladstone — 
were  given  to  the  world.  Seeker  helped  his  friend 
in  both  these  publications,  his  efforts  being  especially 
directed  to  making  Butler's  style  more  familiar,  and 
his  meaning  more  obvious. 

Seeker  now  devoted  himself  to  his  duties  as  a  country 
parson.  He  seems  to  have  been  a  very  good  one, 
suiting  his  sermons  to  the  bucolic  taste  and  under- 
standing, visiting  the  poor  and  showing  the  hospitality 
of  the  rectory  to  those  in  easier  circumstances.  The 
medical  knowledge  acquired  in  Paris  even  came  in 
useful,  and  was  placed  at  the  service  of  the  poorest. 
Houghton,  though  very  remote,  suited  Seeker's  studious 
ways,  and  here,  as  he  often  said  in  after  life,  were 
spent  some  of  the  happiest  hours  of  his  life.  But 
Houghton  was  damp  and  relaxing,  and  Mrs.  Seeker 
was  delicate;  and  Seeker's  friends  and  he  himself  had 
to  seek  a  change.    A  plan  was  put  forward  by  Martin 


1768] 


COMES  TO  COURT 


257 


Benson,  who  himself  held  the  prebend  of  Sarum  at 
Durham,  that  one  Dr.  Finney,  who  was  old  and  infirm, 
but  held  the  Rectory  of  Ryton  and  another  prebend  at 
Durham,  should  resign  these,  and  Seeker  should  receive 
them  in  exchange  for  Houghton.  But  difficulties 
arose,  apparently  through  some  one  else  having  a  claim 
to  Ryton.  The  kind  Benson  generously  gave  up  his 
own  prebend  to  satisfy  this  claimant,  and  Seeker's 
exchange  went  through.  On  3rd  June  1727  he  was 
instituted  to  the  third  prebend  in  the  Cathedral  Church 
of  Durham,  and  to  the  living  of  Ryton,  near  Newcastle, 
and  for  the  following  two  years  he  lived  chiefly  at 
Durham,  going  over  every  week  to  officiate  at  Ryton, 
and  spending  two  or  three  months  there  in  the  summer. 
Seeker  was  indebted  for  his  next  promotion  to  Bishop 
Sherlock,  a  learned  and  able  prelate,  if  of  the  broad 
opinions  in  Church  matters  common  in  the  eighteenth 
century.  Sherlock  was  then  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  and 
some  years  later,  in  1748,  succeeded  Gibson  in  the 
Bishopric  of  London.  Sherlock  heard  Seeker  preach  at 
Bath,  and  was  much  impressed  with  his  ability.  He 
brought  him  to  the  notice  of  the  Duke  of  Grafton,  then 
Lord  Chamberlain,  who  in  July  1732  appointed  him  one 
of  the  royal  chaplains.  In  the  following  month,  George  11. 
was  on  one  of  his  visits  to  Hanover,  but  Seeker  preached 
before  the  Queen.  Queen  Caroline,  as  we  have  already 
said,  was  much  interested  in  theological  discussion, 
and  loved  discussing  the  problems  of  religion  with 
divines,  particularly  those  of  Latitudinarian  leanings. 
A  few  days  after  his  sermon  Seeker  was  summoned 
to  the  Queen's  presence,  and  had  a  long  talk  with  her. 
It  was  on  this  occasion  that  he  brought  forward  Butler's 
name,  the  Queen  remarking  that  she  thought  he  had 
been  dead.  It  was  from  Lancelot  Blackburne,  Arch- 
bishop of  York,  whom  the  Queen  afterwards  asked  if 
Butler  were  not  dead,  that  she  received  the  well-known 
answer  :  "  No,  madam,  but  he  is  buried."  Buried  he 
was  in  the  country  at  Stanhope,  but  largely  through 


258 


THOMAS  SECKER  [1758- 


Secker's  exertions  he  came  out  into  life  again,  being 
appointed  chaplain  to  the  Lord  Chancellor  Talbot, 
and  later  Clerk  of  the  Closet  to  Queen  Caroline. 

Seeker  now  had  influential  friends,  and  the  chance 
of  displaying  his  gifts  and  industry  before  those  with 
whom  place  and  power  lay.  Butler's  old  correspondent, 
Dr.  Samuel  Clarke,  had  been  succeeded  in  the  Rectory 
of  St.  James',  Piccadilly,  in  1829,  by  Tyrwhit,  who  had 
married  a  daughter  of  Gibson,  Bishop  of  London. 
But  the  church  was  too  large  for  Tyrwhit 's  voice, 
and  Gibson  proposed  that  the  latter  should  be  given  a 
canonry  at  St.  Paul's,  and  Secter  should  take  St. 
James'.  The  authorities  agreed,  and,  on  i8th  May 
1733,  Seeker  was  instituted  rector,  and  two  months 
later  he  took  his  degree  of  D.C.L.  at  Oxford,  preaching 
as  his  Act  Sermon  his  discourse  on  the  advantages 
and  duties  of  university  education,  which  attained 
great  notoriety,  went  through  several  editions,  and  is 
to  be  found  in  the  second  collection  of  his  Occasional 
Sermons.  The  Weekly  Miscellany  calls  attention  to 
the  absence  of  Scripture  quotations  from  the  sermon, 
and  Horace  Walpole,  as  we  shall  see  later  on,  in  one 
of  his  sneering  references  to  Seeker,  makes  a  like  charge 
on  his  sermons  in  general.  Bishop  Porteous  says  that 
the  only  notice  Seeker  took  of  the  Miscellany's  censure, 
was  that  he  contributed  for  many  years  very  liberally 
towards  supporting  the  author  of  it. 

Seeker  beyond  question  was  a  very  active  and 
efficient  rector  of  St.  James'.  His  parishioners  num- 
bered persons  of  rank  and  position,  many  of  whom 
attended  his  church. 

In  1736,  Frederick,  Prince  of  Wales,  father  of 
George  iii.,  married  the  Princess  of  Saxe-Gotha,  the 
sister  of  the  reigning  duke,  and  the  young  couple  lived 
at  Norfolk  House,  St.  James'  Square.  The  Prince  of 
Wales,  a  good-natured  though  silly  young  man,  about 
this  time,  following  paternal  example,  quarrelled  with 
his  father,  King  George  11.,  and  even  went  so  fapas  to 


1768]  A  ROYAL  PARISHIONER  259 


pose  as  the  opponent  of  Sir  Richard  Walpole,  the  King's 
Prime  Minister,  and  as  Leader  of  the  Opposition. 
The  Prince  regularly  attended  St.  James'  Church. 
The  first  time  he  did  so,  the  quarrel  between  the  King 
and  the  Prince  of  Wales  then  occupying  a  large  portion 
of  the  public  attention,  much  interest,  not  to  say 
amusement,  was  caused  by  the  officiating  clergyman 
beginning  the  service  with  the  words  :  "  I  will  arise 
and  go  to  my  Father,"  etc.  ;  and  some  one  wanting  to 
cap  the  story,  declared  that  the  rector  followed  with 
a  sermon  on  the  text  "  Honour  thy  father  and  thy 
mother."  Bishop  Sherlock  was  anxious  to  defend  his 
protege.  Seeker,  from  the  charge  of  indiscretion,  and 
affirmed  that  if  that  were  Seeker's  text,  he  must  have 
been  giving  a  course  on  the  Ten  Commandments,  and 
could  not  avoid  the  fifth  in  its  turn.  But  the  story  was 
a  figment.  Seeker's  text  and  subject  being  quite  different. 

Seeker  was  on  good  terms  with  his  royal  parishioner, 
and  baptized  all  of  his  children  except  two.  He  was 
even  employed  as  an  emissary  to  the  King,  with  a  view 
to  patching  up  the  quarrel.  In  this  he  failed,  and 
thereby  incurred  the  touchy  little  monarch's  displeasure  ; 
for  some  years  Seeker  had  to  submit  to  the  royal  silence 
as  a  penalty  for  his  want  of  success  as  mediator. 

According  to  Horace  Walpole,  George  11.  disliked 
Seeker,  and  on  one  occasion  when  he  was  to  preach  at 
Court  refused  to  go  to  church.  But  for  some  reason 
Horace  Walpole  was  the  inveterate  foe  of  Seeker, 
and  makes  charges  against  him  without  foundation. 
He  says  of  him  that  he  had  been  "  bred  a  Presby- 
terian and  Man-midwife,  which  sect  and  profession  he 
had  dropt  for  a  season."  This  seems  a  spiteful  and 
unfair  reference  to  the  facts  we  have  narrated,  viz. 
that  his  father  was  a  Nonconformist  and  that  he  had 
attended  Gregoire's  lectures  on  midwifery  while  studying 
medicine  at  Paris.  More  serious  is  the  charge  that  he 
had  been  president  of  a  very  free-thinking  club.  This 
seems  to  have  referred  to  something  during  his  residence 


26o 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


at  Ley  den,  but  the  evidence  which  Walpole  gives  is 
very  unsatisfactory,  and  is  contradicted  by  his  friend- 
ship with  men  Hke  Joseph  Butler  and  Martin  Benson. 
The  Reverend  Mr.  Wintle,  a  divine  of  learning  and  good 
character,  a  Bampton  Lecturer  who  for  a  time  was 
one  of  Seeker's  domestic  chaplains,  besides  vindicating 
Seeker's  character  from  strictures  passed  on  it  by 
Bishop  Hurd  in  his  Life  of  Warburton,  also  took  up  the 
cudgels  on  Seeker's  behalf  against  Walpole 's  suggestions. 
He  says:  "Having  myself  been  acquainted  with  the 
archbishop  for  several  years,  having  lived  some  time 
in  his  family,  and  having  had  occasion  to  enquire  with 
much  care  into  the  history  of  his  life,  I  conceive  myself 
entitled  to  no  small  degree  of  credit  in  the  present  case, 
and  from  the  best  opportunities  which  I  have  had,  of 
knowing.  I  do  aver  that  he  never  was  in  the  midwifery 
line,  nor  ever  practised  that  or  any  other  branch  of 
surgery,  and  that  he  never  was  President  of  an  atheistical 
Club."^  St.  John  Loveday,  a  scholar  of  repute  of  the 
same  date,  supported  what  he  calls  "  Wintle 's  satis- 
factory vindication  of  a  great  and  venerable  character."  ^ 

Even  Walpole  has  to  admit  that  when  Rector  of  St. 
James'  it  is  incredible  how  popular  he  grew  in  his 
parish.  Walpole 's  suggestion  that  "  his  sermons  were 
by  a  fashion  that  Seeker  introduced  a  kind  of  moral 
essay  and  as  clear  from  quotations  of  Scripture  as 
when  he  presided  in  a  less  Christian  Society,  but  what 
they  wanted  of  Gospel  was  made  up  by  a  tone  of  fanatic- 
ism in  that  he  still  retained,"  seems  nothing  but  a 
spiteful  sneer,  and  is  contradicted  by  an  examination 
of  his  published  sermons. 

There  seems  equally  little  foundation  for  Walpole's 
suggestion  that  he  acted  in  any  way  discreditably  in 
connection  with  the  marriage  of  Lord  Chancellor 
Hardwicke's  son  and  the  heiress  of  the  Duke  of  Kent, 
who  became  Marchioness  de  Grey. 

1  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  477. 
"  Ibid.,  iu.  478. 


1768] 


BISHOP  OF  BRISTOL 


261 


Queen  Caroline  seems,  however,  to  have  been  pleased 
with  Seeker,  and  took  occasion  to  express  to  him  her 
pleasure  with  his  Oxford  Act  Sermon,  which  assisted  his 
further  promotion.  Certain  it  is  that  such  promotion 
soon  followed.  Bishop  Gibson  was  still  Walpole's 
Pope,  and  it  was  through  him  that  Seeker  received,  in 
December  1734,  the  news  that  he  was  to  be  the  new 
Bishop  of  Bristol.  Other  episcopal  appointments  were 
made  about  the  same  time.  Fleming  was  appointed  to 
Carlisle.  Gloucester  was  vacant,  and  Lord  Chancellor 
Talbot  had  designed  this  for  his  father's  chaplain,  Dr. 
Rundle.  But  Rundle's  indiscreet  tongue  was  his  enemy. 
Gibson  was  led,  by  report  of  some  "  imprudences  of 
speech  "  relating  to  Abraham's  offering  of  his  son 
Isaac,  to  oppose  the  appointment,  and  Martin  Benson, 
the  early  friend  of  Butler  and  Seeker,  was  after  much 
hesitation  and  persuasion  appointed  Bishop  of  Glou- 
cester.^ 

Seeker,  Benson,  and  Fleming  were  all  consecrated 
together  in  Lambeth  Palace  Chapel  on  19th  January 
173s,  the  sermon  being  preached  by  Thomas,  Bishop 
of  Winchester. 

Bristol  was  a  poorly  endowed  bishopric,  and  Seeker, 
according  to  what  was  expected  at  the  time,  retained 
with  his  bishopric  the  Rectory  of  St.  James'. 

The  average  Englishman  likes  a  parson  who  is  a 
good  man  of  business.  The  parish  accounts  at  St. 
James'  were  in  much  disorder  when  Seeker  came.  He 
reorganised  them,  and  while  rector  kept  his  eye  on 
them.  He  carefully  prepared  in  the  vestry  the  candi- 
dates from  his  parish  for  the  Confirmations  which  he 
held  yearly  ;  he  distributed  tracts,  and  prepared  for  his 
parishioners  a  course  of  Lectures  on  the  Church  Cate- 
chism. These  he  read  on  Sunday  evenings,  and  at 
stated  times  in  the  week  as  well.  They  were  well 
attended,  and  attained  universal  approbation.  At  the 
present  day  they  would  be  considered  an  ordinary 

^  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  478. 


262 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


performance  ;  but  when  they  were  pubhshed  they 
appeared  to  be,  and  in  fact  were,  an  almost  unique  effort 
to  put  before  Church  people  of  no  special  learning  or 
attainments  a  plain  statement  of  their  religious  duties. 

Seeker  was  not  stingy  in  money  matters  ;  and  we 
are  told  that  he  provided  out  of  his  own  income  a 
salary  for  reading  morning  and  evening  prayers,  which 
had  been  paid  out  of  the  Church  offertory. 

With  his  sermons  he  took  great  pains  ;  and  he 
acquired  much  reputation  as  a  preacher.  Bishop 
Porteous  says  he  excelled  in  "  saying  the  most  familiar 
things  without  being  low,  the  plainest  without  being 
feeble,  the  boldest  without  giving  offence."  We  rather 
expect  in  an  early  eighteenth-century  sermon  a  well- 
composed  but  dull  essay— moral  reflections  almost 
amounting  to  truisms,  well-balanced  if  elaborate 
sentences,  and  by  no  means  overmuch  doctrine.  Seeker 
is  much  better  than  this.  His  subjects  are  practical; 
his  sentences  short.  Nor  is  a  sense  of  humour  wanting. 
In  his  sermon  on  the  text,  "  Take  heed  how  ye  hear," 
some  of  his  comments  on  the  behaviour  of  certain  of 
his  hearers  seem  to  have  a  distinctly  humorous  vein. 
"  Not  a  few,"  says  he,  "  are  engaged  so  deeply  in 
observation  of  what  they  see  at  church  that  they  have 
no  room  left  for  taking  notice  of  what  they  hear.  There 
are  persons  too  who  have  so  much  to  say  one  to  another 
that  they  lose  and  make  those  around  lose  much  of 
what  the  preacher  hath  to  say  to  them  all."  Better 
still  is  the  next  :  "  Frequent  mutual  informations,  it 
seems,  are  of  such  importance  and  necessity  to  be  com- 
municated immediately  that  even  the  duties  of  hearken- 
ing to  God's  Word  in  the  lessons  and  singing  His  praises 
in  the  psalms  must  give  way  to  them."  Things  in 
church  were  much  as  when  early  in  the  nineteenth 
century  the  fashionable  Rules  of  Deportment  for  a 
Lady  gave  as  a  direction  on  entering  church,  "  Bow 
to  your  acquaintances,  pass  on,  and  compose  yourself 
to  prayer." 


1768]     A  PARLIAMENTARY  REPORTER  263 


As  we  shall  see  later  on,  Seeker  was  a  by  no  means 
indifferent  speaker  in  Parliament.  But  from  the  Parlia- 
mentary History  he  does  not  appear  to  have  spoken 
in  the  Lords  while  Bishop  of  Bristol.  He,  however, 
attended  in  Parliament,  and  from  a  few  months  after  his 
consecration  began  his  notes  or  reports  of  the  speeches 
which  he  heard  there.  With  characteristic  industry- 
he  had  learnt  shorthand  ;  and  the  Prefaces  to  the 
Parliamentary  History  of  the  period  show  that  these 
notes  of  Seeker  were  the  basis  of  some  of  the  very  earliest 
verbatim  reports  of  parliamentary  proceedings .  The  first 
of  Seeker's  reports  is  of  a  debate  on  the  quartering  of 
soldiers  at  Elections,  and  is  dated  15th  April  1735. 
Of  the  same  date  is  the  report  of  another  debate  on 
applying  part  of  the  Sinking  Fund  to  the  service  of  the 
current  year.  These  notes  were  first  taken  down  in  short- 
hand and  afterwards  written  out  at  large.  They  strike 
the  reader  as  being  most  skilfully  and  usefully  taken. 
There  is  a  break  in  the  notes  after  the  two  debates 
mentioned  above  till  May  1738,  by  which  time  Seeker 
had  become  Bishop  of  Oxford,  but  they  were  continued 
thence  till  1743. 

As  Bishop  of  Bristol,  Seeker  at  once  set  about  a 
visitation  of  his  diocese,  and  preached  and  confirmed 
in  many  places.  But  he  was  not  to  be  long  at  Bristol. 
In  those  days  the  personal  conveniences  of  the  men  high 
in  the  Church  as  well  as  in  the  State  counted  for  much. 
We  have  told,  in  the  life  of  Archbishop  Potter,  how  it 
was  that  he  was  removed  from  Oxford  to  Canterbury. 
Seeker  was  offered  Potter's  place  at  Oxford,  but  at  first 
declined  it.  The  influential  Sherlock,  however,  wanted 
Bristol  for  his  brother-in-law.  Dr.  Gooch  ;  and  Seeker 
was  prevailed  on  to  make  the  change,  being  confirmed 
in  May  1737  as  Bishop  of  Oxford. 

When  in  the  fall  of  the  same  year  Queen  Caroline 
died,  Seeker  occupied  the  Court  pulpit  on  the  following 
Sunday  ;  his  sermon  pleased  the  Princesses,  and  is  said 
to  have  been  read  even  by  the  royal  widower  ;  but  the 
18 


264 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


latter's  hostility  to  Seeker  seems  not  to  have  been 
entirely  removed  by  the  perusal.  Oxford,  like  Bristol, 
was  a  poorly  paid  bishopric,  and  there  was  no  suggestion 
that  Seeker  should  give  up  his  Rectory  of  St.  James', 
Piccadilly.  After  his  move  to  Oxford,  Seeker  seems 
not  only  to  have  continued  his  taking  notes  of  the  debates 
in  the  House  of  Lords,  but  occasionally  to  have  shared 
in  those  debates.  No  doubt,  it  was  generally  felt — and 
he  himself  must  have  known — that  his  intellectual  and 
moral  equipment  was  quite  as  good  as  if  not  better  than 
that  of  most  of  his  episcopal  colleagues.  And  he  seems 
not  to  have  felt  the  shyness  in  parliamentary  speaking 
which  troubled  some  spiritual  Peers.  In  the  Life  and 
Anecdotes  of  Bishop  Newton,  author  of  Prophecy,  it  is 
said  that  he  "  never  attempted  to  speak  in  Parliament, 
for  he,  as  well  as  most  other  bishops,  entered  into  the 
House  of  Lords  atatime  too  late  to  begin  such  exercises."  ^ 
"  Some  previous  practice,"  the  author  goes  on,  "  is 
requisite,  which  renders  lawyers  so  much  readier  and 
abler  speakers  than  the  generality  of  divines.  While 
the  convocation  was  allowed  to  sit  it  was  a  kind  of 
School  of  Oratory  for  the  clergy,  and  hence  Atterbury 
and  others  became  such  able  speakers  in  the  House  of 
Lords."  Seeker  at  any  rate  by  the  time  he  was  Bishop 
of  Oxford  had  found  his  feet  among  the  Peers.  His 
first  effort  was  when  he  vigorously  opposed  the  Bill 
put  forward  by  Walpole  and  his  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer, Sandys,  to  lower  the  heavy  duties  on  spirituous 
liquors  imposed  by  the  Act  of  1731,  of  which  we  have 
spoken  in  Archbishop  Potter's  life,  when  three  eminent 
doctors  at  the  archbishop's  suggestion  attended  the 
House  of  Lords  to  tell  its  members  how  bad  ardent  spirits 
were  for  human  beings.  All  his  episcopal  colleagues 
followed  Seeker's  lead  in  opposing  the  Bill.  A  short 
time  afterwards  the  established  clergy  of  Scotland  tried 
to  get  a  'Bill  through  the  Lords  setting  up  a  scheme  for 
the  maintenance  of  their  widows  and  children.  Con- 

1  Newton's  Life  and  Anecdotes,  p.  137. 


1768]       DUCHESS  OF  MARLBOROUGH  265 


trary  to  the  Scots'  expectations,  the  EngUsh  bishops, 
and  particularly  Seeker,  proved  their  friends,  not  op- 
ponents. 

As  Bishop  of  Oxford,  Seeker  became  the  neighbour 
of  the  celebrated  Sarah,  Duchess  of  Marlborough.  At 
her  request  he  visited  her  at  Blenheim.  The  great  lady 
seems  to  have  been  struck  with  his  capacity  and  in- 
tegrity, and  after  a  few  interviews  asked  him  to  be  one 
of  her  executors,  reading  to  him  at  the  same  time  the 
clause  in  her  will  giving  her  executors  ;^2000  apiece. 
Seeker  was  on  very  friendly  terms  with  Lord  Chancellor 
Hardwicke ;  and  perhaps  like  a  wise  man  he  consulted 
the  great  lawyer  before  accepting  the  office  of  executor  ; 
but  Hardwicke,  who  was  also  a  friend  of  the  Duchess,  saw 
no  objection,  and  he  consented  and  afterwards  proved  the 
will.  Seeker  seems  to  have  spoken  straightly  and  acted 
in  an  upright  manner  to  the  wealthy  testatrix.  He  dis- 
couraged the  legacy  to  himself,  telling  her  what  was  not 
true,  that  he  was  as  rich  as  her  Grace,  and  opposed 
also  her  leaving  so  much  to  non-relations — it  may  be 
remembered  that  the  elder  Pitt  owed  his  independence 
largely  to  an  ample  legacy  from  her.  Seeker  is  said  to 
have  been  surprised  at  her  death  to  find  himself  left 
in  as  an  executor. 

Though  a  sound  Churchman,  Seeker  supported  Whig 
ideas,  and  was  on  terms  of  friendship  with  Sir  Robert 
Walpole  and  his  great  Chancellor,  Lord  Hardwicke. 
In  Oxford,  the  seat  of  his  see,  he  found  Tories  in  abund- 
ance and  even  some  Jacobites  ;  but  he  avoided  falling 
foul  of  them,  and  perhaps  his  zealousness  in  the  dis- 
charge of  his  episcopal  duties  helped  him  in  this  respect. 
The  great  Minister  Walpole  fell  in  February  1742.  It 
was  shortly  before  this,  when  he  was  tottering,  that 
Seeker  was  employed  by  him  to  try  and  bring  the  Prince 
of  Wales  to  terms  with  his  father.^  The  Prince  was 
bitterly  opposed  to  Walpole,  as  apparently  his  father's 
friend,  and  helped  the  Opposition  headed  by  Boling- 

*  Life  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  i.  532. 


266 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


broke  as  much  as  he  could.  The  message  to  the  Prince 
conveyed  through  Seeker  ^  was  that  if  the  Prince 
would  write  a  letter  of  condescension  to  the  King  he 
should  be  taken  into  favour,  his  debts  paid,  and  his 
revenue  increased  by  ;£5o,ooo.  But  the  ambassage 
failed  :  the  Prince  insisted  that  Walpole  must  go  ; 
and  with  George  11.,  who  thought  Seeker  might  have 
done  more,  he  remained  in  disgrace. 

In  the  Young  Pretender's  Rebellion  of  1745  Seeker 
was  to  the  fore.  He  preached  a  great  sermon  full  of 
loyalty  to  the  reigning  dynasty,  and  fury  and  thunder 
for  its  enemies  in  St.  James'  as  soon  as  the  royal 
message  to  Parliament  (composed,  we  learn  from  Lord 
Hardwicke's  Lije^  by  him)  announcing  the  meditated 
invasion  of  Britain  by  Charles  Edward  was  received. 
The  Commons  passed  almost  without  discussion  a  Bill 
preventing  correspondence  with  the  Pretender's  sons. 
But  in  the  Lords,  Lord  Hardwicke  moved  amendments 
attainting  of  high  treason  the  Pretender's  sons  if  they 
should  attempt  to  land,  and  extending  the  attainder 
to  the  children  of  those  convicted  under  the  Act, 
or,  to  be  more  exact,  suspending  an  Act  of  Anne  which 
would  have  restricted  the  forfeiture  on  attainder  to 
the  person  convicted.  On  the  last  proposal  there  was  a 
big  debate.  The  text  in  Ezekiel,  "  the  son  shall  not 
bear  the  iniquities  of  the  father,"  was  really  the  text 
on  which  what  we  may  call  the  Liberals  of  the  day, 
the  Duke  of  Bedford,  Lord  Hervey,  Lord  Talbot,  and 
others,  preached  in  opposing  the  amendment.  The 
Lord  Chancellor  Hardwicke  made  a  great  speech  in 
support  of  it,  and  foremost  among  its  other  supporters 
was  Seeker,  who  spoke  extempore  but  with  great  force. 
He  sent  a  circular  letter  on  it  to  his  clergy  on  the  subject 
of  the  Rebellion,  and  headed  an  address  from  them  to 
the  Crown.  He  furbished  up  his  sermon  preached 
at  St.  James'  with  alterations  and  amendments,  preached 
it  again  more  than  once,  and  after  attending  a  county 

*  Mahoa's  History,  iii.  98.  -  Life  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  ii.  65. 


1768]        THE  SCOTTISH  EPISCOPATE  267 


meeting  at  Oxford  presented  it  in  its  improved  shape 
to  the  King. 

Seeker  had  two  powerful  friends  in  Newcastle  and 
Hardwicke.  In  1747  York  fell  vacant  through  the 
promotion  of  Herring  to  succeed  Potter.  It  is  said 
that  Newcastle  and  Hardwicke  recommended  Seeker 
to  George  11.  for  the  northern  archdiocese,  but  the 
old  King  seems  to  have  thought  that  Seeker  had  been 
in  opposition  at  Oxford  and  said,  "  I  will  have  no 
Seeker." 

Early  in  1 748  Seeker  had  the  misfortune  to  lose 
his  wife.  In  spite  of  her  ill-health  throughout  nearly 
the  whole  of  their  twenty  years'  married  life,  Seeker's 
home  life  had  been  happy.  He  was  fond  of  her,  and 
her  intellectual  gifts  made  her  a  fit  wife  for  him.  He 
is  said  to  have  "  attended  her  in  all  her  long  illnesses 
with  the  greatest  care  and  tenderness,"  and  to  have 
been  "  always  ready  to  break  off  any  engagement  or 
any  study  "  if  his  company  could  ease  or  cheer  her. 

The  Rebellion  in  1745  made  Englishmen  bitter 
against  things  Scottish,  and  in  1748  the  Speech  from 
the  Throne  recommended  certain  regulations  relative 
to  Scotland  which  were  embodied  in  a  Bill  for  disarming 
the  Highlanders  and  restraining  the  use  of  Highland 
costume.  The  Bill  also  contained  provision  with 
respect  to  the  episcopal  clergy  that  only  letters  of 
orders  granted  by  an  English  or  Irish  bishop  should 
be  deemed  valid  in  Scotland  in  spite  of  registration 
according  to  a  former  Act.  No  doubt  many  of  the 
Scottish  episcopal  clergy,  like  the  nonjuring  bishops, 
were  secretly  "  promoters,"  as  Lord  Hardwicke  said, 
"  of  disloyalty  and  rebellion  "  ;  but  the  prelates  in 
the  House  of  Lords,  including  Herring,  Sherlock,  Seeker, 
and  Butler,  treated  the  clause  as  an  attack  upon 
Episcopacy.  The  clergy  in  question,  said  they,  have 
been  duly  ordained  by  persons  holding  the  office  of 
bishops,  who,  even  though  deprived  of  their  sees  by 
the  State,  would  remain  bishops  and  capable  of  con- 


268 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


ferring  valid  orders.  If  willing  to  take  the  oaths  of 
fidelity  they  should  be  allowed  to  minister,  and  to  refuse 
them  permission  to  do  so  was  to  ruin  them  unjustly. 
Seeker  led  off  the  opposition  to  the  clause  enforcing 
these  arguments  in  a  speech  of  half  an  hour.  He  was 
answered  by  his  friend,  and  shall  we  say  patron,  Lord 
Hardwicke,  in  what  is  said  to  have  been  one  of  his 
happiest  efforts,  and  in  Committee  the  clause  was 
rejected  by  32  to  28.  But  on  report  Lord  Hardwicke 
exerted  himself  to  the  uttermost,  expressing  his  appre- 
hensions of  the  dangerous  wound  which  would  be  given 
to  His  Majesty,  and  to  the  Constitution,  if  that  House 
should  show  the  least  tenderness  for  any  authority 
temporal  or  spiritual  set  up  in  opposition  to  them. 

Seeker's  opposition  to  Hardwicke  on  this  occasion 
seems  to  have  been  certainly  creditable  to  him.  Seeker's 
emoluments  were  still  moderate  ;  and  the  Chancellor 
had  sounded  him  a  little  before  about  his  having 
the  rich  Deanery  of  St.  Paul's  in  exchange  for  his 
Prebend  of  Durham  and  Rectory  of  St.  James'. 

There  was  a  general  impression  among  those  in 
authority  that  Seeker  deserved  a  move,  and  upward 
At  the  end  of  1749  Archbishop  Herring  had  written  to 
Newcastle  suggesting  that  he  should  recommend  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford  for  Lichfield,  which  was  vacant.  It 
was  time,  he  thought.  Seeker  should  give  up  St.  James', 
he  having  spent  "  a  long  course  of  years  in  the  most 
laborious  and  important  cure  in  the  kingdom,"  and, 
sound  Whig  as  he  was,  the  archbishop  suggests  that 
Seeker  deserves  reward  or  solatium  for  having  been 
"  used  ill  by  the  disaffected  Oxonians." 

A  few  months  later  the  archbishop  writes  again. 
Bishop  Chandler  of  Durham  was  lying  seriously  ill ;  his 
recovery  was  not  expected.  Butler  was  designed  to 
have  Durham,  and  his  promotion  would  set  free  the 
Bishopric  of  Bristol  and  the  much  more  lucrative 
Deanery  of  St.  Paul's.    The  letter  runs  : 

1  Newcastle  Corr.,  add).  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32719,  f.  326. 


1768]  HIS  FAREWELL  SERMON  269 


"  It  was  a  great  pleasure  to  me  to  find  yr  Grace 
favour  so  much  the  removal  of  the  Bishop,  of  Oxford  to 
the  Deanery  of  St.  Paul's  on  the  demise  of  Durham. 
It  will  be  otium  cum  dignitate  and  an  handsome  retire- 
ment to  him  from  a  Life  and  Station  of  more  than 
ordinary  labour."  ^ 

As  soon  as  Durham  was  actually  vacant  the  arch- 
bishop renews  the  suggestion  to  Newcastle,  "  whether 
St.  Paul's  as  a  Dignity  of  great  honour  and  ease  and  of 
a  handsome  revenue  would  not  be  well  bestow'd  on  a 
man  so  sincerely  affected  to  His  Majesty  as  the  Bishop 
of  Oxford  has  approved  himself,  who  is  of  so  distinguished 
abilities,  has  taken  so  much  pains  in  a  great  parochial 
cure,  and  who  begins  to  be  upon  the  Decline  of  Life."^ 

The  Chancellor  at  once  wrote  to  the  Duke  of  Newcastle, 
who  was  with  his  truant  master  at  Hanover,  recom- 
mending Seeker  for  St.  Paul's.    George  11.  consented,  and 
he  was  installed  in  December  17S0.    Seeker  was  now 
free  from  his  onerous  duties  as  parish  priest.    He  was 
fifty-seven,  and  had  been  seventeen  years  at  St.  James'. 
He  had  worked  hard,  and  even  his  malevolent  critic, 
Horace  Walpole,  says,  referring  to  his  time  there  :  "  It  is 
incredible  how  popular  he  grew  in  his  parish."    We  are 
told  by  Bishop  Porteous  that  "  when  he  preached  his 
farewell  sermon  the  whole  audience  melted  into  tears." 
The  sermon  is  one  of  those  published  in  his  works, 
and  it  strikes  us  as  a  remarkably  successful  effort.  In 
pithy,  practical  sentences  the  preacher  dwells  on  the 
points  requiring  attention  on  such  an  occasion,  how  his 
parishioners  had  dealt  with  him,  how  and  with  what 
results  he  with  them  ;  how  were  they  going  to  greet 
his  successor  ?    It  is  better  for  him  to  go  before  he  is 
past  work  ;  they  have  had  the  best  years  of  his  working 
life.    "  It  is  better,"  he  says,  "  you  should  be  grieved 
at  my  departure  than  weary  of  my  stay."  Money 
had  no  part  in  bringing  him  to  or  in  removing  him 
from  St.  James'.    "  I  had  a  large  income  in  the  Church," 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32720,  f.  217.  *  Ubi  supra,  32721,  f.  424. 


270 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


he  says,  "  when  I  came  hither  ;  I  have  not  enriched 
myself  by  my  abode  here  ;  I  shall  not  enrich  myself 
by  going  from  hence."  There  is  a  practical  tone  which 
is  pleasing  in  the  following  passage,  addressed,  be  it 
remembered,  to  a  fashionable  congregation,  though  the 
words  he  uses  in  reference  to  the  Holy  Communion 
rather  grate  on  our  ears.  "  Surely  you  may  prevail 
on  yourselves  if  need  be  to  alter  your  usual  hour  of 
eating  or  visiting  once  or  twice  a  week  in  order  to 
come  the  oftener  and  adore  your  Maker,  to  hear  His 
Word,  and  give  your  servants  time  to  do  the  same 
thing.  Nay,  why  may  not  many  of  you  so  regulate 
your  affairs  as  to  frequent  daily  prayers  in  the  church  ? 
Few  of  you,  I  fear,  have  them  in  your  families  ;  I  speak 
this  to  your  shame.  Nor  must  I  fail  to  remind  you, 
as  you  know  I  have  often  done,  of  that  highly  useful 
and  by  no  means  terrible  or  difficult  duty  of  receiving 
the  Lord's  Supper — enjoined  on  all  Christians  and  yet 
absolutely  slighted  by  most." 

With  his  greater  leisure  Seeker  became  busier  with 
his  pen.  Since  the  days  when  he  corrected  the  proofs 
and  amended  the  draft  of  the  great  Butler,  he  seems  to 
have  been  a  great  hand  at  assisting  other  authors  whose 
opinions  he  shared.  Dr.  Church  published  a  Vindica- 
tion of  the  Miraculous  Powers  against  Dr.  Middleton 
in  1 75 1,  and  an  analysis  of  Lord  Bolingbroke's  works 
a  few  years  later.  Seeker  helped  much  in  the  pro- 
duction of  these  treatises.  About  the  same  time  he 
assisted  Archdeacon  Sharp  in  bringing  out  some  con- 
troversial works  against  the  Hutchinsonians,  a  set  of 
Christians  of  almost  exaggerated  orthodoxy,  who  con- 
demned the  Newtonian  philosophy  as  being  unscriptural, 
and,  having  in  general  the  most  profound  reverence 
for  Holy  Scriptures,  held,  as  Canon  Perry  says,  some 
singular  theories  "as  to  Hebrew  roots  and  the  arche- 
typal character  of  the  Hebrew  language." 

In  1 75 1  Seeker  lost,  to  his  great  grief,  his  two  bishop 
friends,   Benson,  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  and  Butler, 


1768]        DEATH  OF  BISHOP  BUTLER  271 


Bishop  of  Durham,  with  whom  he  had  been  on  terms 
of  affectionate  intimacy  from  boyhood .  Benson,  in  fact, 
lost  his  Hfe  through  going,  at  Seeker's  request,  to  Bath 
to  visit  Butler,  who  was  ill  there.  He  was  obliged  to  go 
hurriedly  from  Bath  on  horseback  to  hold  a  confirmation 
in  the  northern  part  of  his  diocese,  and  the  fatigues  of 
the  journeys  brought  on  an  inflammation  of  which  he 
died. 

In  a  letter,  dated  the  8th  August  1752,  written  from 
Cuddesden,  Seeker  says  : 

"Dr.  Irwin"  (a  celebrated  Oxford  physician  of  the 
day,  whose  bust  is  in  the  Library  at  Christ  Church) 
"  thinks  the  Bishop  of  Gloucester's  case  to  be  a 
rheumatism  occasioned  by  an  excessive  fatigue  when  he 
went  to  see  the  poor  Bishop  of  Durham  at  Bath  and 
by  a  cold  took  afterwards  ;  and  hopes  he  will  soon  be 
better." 

But  ten  days  later  he  gives  a  less  favourable  account : 

"  The  good  Bishop  of  Gloucester  is  in  a  very  weak 
and,  I  fear,  dangerous  condition.  His  pains  continue, 
and  several  paralytic  symptoms  have  appeared  since  I 
wrote  to  you  last.  I  had  a  letter  from  him  on  Friday, 
in  which  he  speaks  of  his  case  as  one  who  thinks  it 
desperate  ;  but  writes  with  much  cheerful  composure, 
as  well  he  may  ;  and  introduces  a  variety  of  subjects. 
We  have  all  asked  leave  to  come  to  him,  but  cannot 
obtain  it.  And  whether  we  shall  ever  see  him  more  in 
this  world,  God  knows,  and  His  will  be  done.  Dr.  Irwin 
had  once  advised  his  going  to  Bath  ;  but  hath  changed 
his  mind." 

Within  the  same  twelve  months  Seeker  had  also  to 
lament  the  death  of  the  celebrated  philosopher.  Bishop 
Berkeley,  who  was  his  friend. 

The  next  year,  1753,  saw  Seeker  busy  in  Parliament 
over  what  was  known  as  the  Jew  Bill,  to  which  we 
have  already  referred  ;  and  on  this  measure  his  conduct 
may  be  thought  less  free  from  question  than  it  usually 
was.    An  Act  was  passed  in  the  summer  of  1753  per- 


272 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


mitting  Jews  to  be  naturalised.    There  seems  not  to 
have  been  much  debate  on  it.    Some  business  people 
supported  it  as  likely  to  bring  money  into  the  country. 
But  it  had  a  clause  in  it  which  prevented  a  Jew  from 
being  the  patron  of  a  living  or  ecclesiastical  office. 
Newcastle    and    Hardwicke,    however,    had  under- 
estimated the  power  of  anti-semitism.    During  the 
recess  there  was  such  a  clamour  against  the  measure 
that  on  the  very  first  day  of  the  next  Session  the  Prime 
Minister,  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  brought  forward  a  Bill 
repealing  the  Act  of  the  preceding  Session.    Here  was 
a  difficult  situation  !    There  were  no  new  facts  ;  apart 
from  the  merits  a  good  rule  fieri  non  debet  factum  valet 
forbade   the  repeal.    As   Earl  Temple   said,  it  was 
beneath  the  dignity  of  Parliament  to  pass  a  law  one 
Session  and  repeal  it  the  next.    Seeker  came  to  the 
Government's  help  and  made  a  successful  speech  for 
the  repeal  ;   though  one  noble  lord  said  that  for  the 
greater  part  of  the  speech  he  thought  the  bishop  was 
opposing  the  repeal,  he  having  advanced  more  in  favour 
of  the  Bill  than  he  had  ever  heard  before.  Seeker 
wanted   to  preserve  the  clause  about  patronage  of 
livings,  but  the  House  would  be  satisfied  with  nothing 
but  complete  repeal. 

As  Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  Seeker  attended  the  Cathedral 
service  morning  and  evening  every  day ;  and  arranged 
with  the  other  residentiaries  to  preach  in  turn  on 
Sunday  afternoons.  His  good  business  qualities  and 
habits  were  very  useful  to  him  as  Dean.  There  was  a 
fund  vested  in  trustees  appropriated  towards  repairs 
of  the  Cathedral .  The  accounts  of  this  fund  had  got  into 
confusion.  Seeker  overhauled  them  and  got  the  trustees 
to  agree  to  a  proper  apportionment  of  the  expenses. 
The  inhabitants  of  St.  Faith's,  a  city  parish  near  the 
Cathedral,  had  or  claimed  a  share  of,  or  at  any  rate  rights 
over,  St.  Paul's  Churchyard.  It  was  a  thorny  question. 
Seeker  cleared  it  up  and  brought  the  men  of  St.  Faith's 
to   an   agreement.    He  indexed   the   old  Cathedral 


1768]  A  WHIG  IN  OXFORD 


273 


documents,  made  extracts  of  what  was  material  from 
the  registers  and  books  in  the  chapter-house  for  the 
use  of  himself  and  his  successors,  and  corrected  with 
the  original  the  copy  of  the  ancient  statute  book  then  in 
use. 

As  diocesan,  Seeker  maintained  his  character  of 
being  no  idler.  When  in  residence  at  Cuddesden,  where 
he  spent  the  summer  months,  he  generally  preached 
in  the  parish  church  every  Sunday  morning,  and  read 
a  lecture  on  the  Catechism  in  the  evening.  His 
episcopal  charges  received  attention  and  general 
approval.  His  proximity  to  Oxford  doubtless  caused 
him  from  time  to  time  anxiety.  "  The  home  of  lost 
causes  "  had  within  its  walls  men,  and  men  of  learning 
and  weight,  who  hankered  after  a  Stuart  King  and  all 
that  a  Stuart  King  meant  in  Church  and  State.  In 
1746  two  students  of  the  University  were  tried  in  the 
King's  Bench  for  disloyalty  and  for  having  openly 
proposed  the  Pretender's  health  :  they  were  convicted 
and  fined,  and  had,  according  to  the  sentence,  to  "walk 
immediately  round  Westminster  Hall  with  a  title  affixed 
to  their  foreheads  denoting  their  crime  and  sentence  "  ; 
and  for  the  personally  attractive  Pretender  the  first 
two  Georges  were  a  poor  set  off.  Seeker  was  known  to 
be  an  out-and-out  supporter  of  the  reigning  dynasty  ; 
nay  more,  not  only  was  he  a  supporter,  but  a  friend  of 
the  Duke  of  Newcastle  and  Lord  Hardwicke.  In  the 
General  Election  of  1754,  shortly  after  the  death  of 
Henry  Pelham,  the  ablest  of  the  Ministry,  party  feeling 
ran  high.  It  was  thought  the  best  course  to  make  his 
less  able  brother,  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  Premier, 
though  in  the  Lords.  Fox  refused,  and  Pitt  was  as  yet 
not  asked  to  lead  the  Commons.  The  Government 
was  doubtful  of  the  Elections,  and  Seeker  felt  it  his  duty 
to  support  them.  This  must  have  chagrined  his  Tory 
neighbours  at  Oxford.  But  he  managed  to  keep  good 
friends  with  the  University  as  a  whole,  and  even  his 
opponents  respected  him  as  learned  and  industrious. 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


Archbishop  Hutton's  death  on  19th  March  1758  was 
sudden. 

The  vacillations,  the  jealousies,  the  intrigues  which 
in  1757  had  left  the  country  for  eleven  weeks  without  a 
Ministry  were  over.  Newcastle  had  resigned  in  1756 
from  sheer  incapacity  to  steer  the  country  through  its 
foreign  complications.  But  he  loved  his  patronage  as 
Minister,  and  was  jealous  any  one  else  should  have  it  ; 
and  the  majority  of  the  House  of  Commons  were,  as  the 
result  of  his  corrupt  methods,  "  his  men."  The  Ministry 
of  Devonshire  and  Pitt  which  followed  Newcastle's 
resignation  was  a  failure.  The  King  was  always  think- 
ing of  Hanover,  and  did  not  want  Pitt,  for  it  was  the 
"  being  thought  an  enemy  to  Hanover  "  that  was,  as 
Lord  Waldegrave  says,  "  the  solid  foundation  of  Pitt's 
popularit3^"  ^ 

So  by  the  second  half  of  1757,  all  other  expedients 
having  failed,  and  though,  as  Lord  Waldegrave  says, 
"  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  hated  Pitt  as  much  as  Pitt 
the  Duke  of  Newcastle,"^  the  Pitt-Newcastle  coalition 
was  formed  on  terms  of  Newcastle  managing  the 
patronage,  and  Pitt,  as  Mr.  Gardiner  says,  "  the  business 
of  politics  and  the  war."  ^ 

The  account  which  Horace  Walpole  gives  of  Seeker's 
elevation  to  Canterbury  is  as  follows  : 

.  "  On  Hutton's  death  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  had 
great  inclination  to  give  Canterbury  to  Dr.  Hay  Drum- 
mond.  Bishop  of  St.  Asaph,  a  gentleman,  a  man  of  parts 
and  of  the  world,  but  Lord  Hardwicke's  influence  carried 
it  for  Seeker,  who  certainly  did  not  want  parts  or 
worldliness."  * 

Dr.  Drummond,  who  was  of  aristocratic  birth,  being 
second  son  of  the  eighth  Earl  of  Kinnoul,  had  attended 
George  11.  in  the  campaign  of  1743,  and  preached  the 


^  Memoirs  of  Lord  Waldegrave,  130. 

2  Ubi  supra,  130.  *  student's  History,  751. 

*  Walpole's  Memoirs  of  Geo.  II.,  iii.  107. 


1768]    "  THE  MAN  "  FOR  CANTERBURY  275 


thanksgiving  sermon  at  Hanover  for  the  Dettingen 
victory.^ 

In  the  letter  to  Lyttelton  which  we  have  already 
quoted,  written  three  days  after  Archbishop  Hutton's 
death,  Horace  Walpole  says:  "  It  is  believed  that  St. 
Durham  goes  to  Canterbury."  "St.  Durham "  was 
Trevor,  Bishop  of  Durham. 

But  from  the  letters  of  those  most  intimately  con- 
cerned with  the  appointment  of  a  Primate  there  never 
seems  to  have  been  a  shadow  of  doubt  about  Seeker 
filling  the  vacancy.  The  King,  of  course,  had  to  be 
reckoned  with,  but  beside  him  Hardwicke  and  New- 
castle were  the  men  with  whom  the  appointment  lay. 
Poor  Archbishop  Hutton  died  on  the  evening  of  Sunday, 
19th  March,  and  the  very  next  day  Lord  Hardwicke 
writes  to  Newcastle,  the  Prime  Minister  : 

"  I  did  not  hear  that  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
was  ill  till  late  last  night,  and  am  now  extremely  sorry 
for  the  loss  of  so  considerable  and  valuable  a  man. 
I  conjectured  that  his  illness  just  at  this  time  might 
be  owing  to  the  fatiguing  attendances  of  last  week.  .  .  . 

"  Who  shd  be  his  successor  is  undoubtedly  a  question 
of  the  greatest  importance  in  every  respect.  I  am 
clearly  of  opinion  that  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  ought  to 
be  the  man,  for  all  kinds  of  reasons,  and  I  hope  the 
King  will  in  his  wisdom  make  no  difficulties  about 
it."2 

On  the  same  Monday,  Newcastle  writes  to  Seeker, 
and  says  that  he  had  told  the  King  that  morning  that 
it  was  "  absolutely  necessary  in  the  present  situation 
of  the  King  and  the  kingdom.  His  Majesty  shd  make 
choice  for  the  See  of  Canterbury  of  one  of  the  greatest 
eminence  in  his  profession,  of  dignity,  weight,  and 
authority,  which  person  I  humbly  thought  shd  be 
the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  and  I  suggested  nobody 
else." 

*  Walpole's  Geo.  III.,  i.  73. 

2  Newcastle  Corn,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32878,  {.  278. 


2/6 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


The  fateful  Monda}'  saw  yet  a  third  letter — Seeker 
to  the  Minister,  dated  from  the  Deanery  of  St.  Paul's  : 

"  I  received  your  Grace's  letter  in  the  midst  of 
company  just  going  to  dinner  with  me,  and  have  but  a 
moment's  time  to  say  that  I  am  quite  terrified  at  the 
unexpected  contents  of  it,  that  I  shall  have  great 
cause  to  be  pleased  if  His  ^Majesty  thinks  of  some 
worthier  person,  that  if  he  should  pitch  on  me  I  must 
endeavour  thro'  God's  help  to  appear  as  little  unworthy 
as  I  can." 

Seeker  was  confirmed  archbishop  at  Bow  Church  on 
the  2 1  St  April  1758. 

George  11.  was  now  becoming  old  and  possibly  in- 
different to  everj-thing  except  the  charms  and  interests 
of  Hanover,  but  it  is  to  his  credit  that  he  fell  in  with 
what  was  a  proper  appointment.  Indeed,  it  is  said  that 
in  the  short  period  that  remained  of  George  11. 's  life  he 
treated  the  new  archbishop  with  much  more  kindness 
than  he  had  shown  him  before. 

Seeker  was  soon  busy  in  making  a  visitation  of  his 
new  archdiocese.  It  seems  from  his  first  charge  to 
the  Diocese  of  Canterbury  that  many  of  the  clergy 
were  non-resident,  giving  as  a  reason  the  unhealthi- 
ness  of  their  livings  or  parsonages.  Seeker  seems  to 
have  taken  a  sensible  if  rather  indulgent  line  \\-ith  such 
cases.  Where  the  parson  made  out  that  he  really 
could  not  reside,  the  archbishop  said,  "  Then  get  a  good 
curate,  and  in  paying  him  remember  what  a  nast}-  place 
3'ou  put  him  in  "  ;  if  the  parson  said,  "  My  stipend  is 
too  small  and  my  children  too  many  for  me  to  pay  any 
curate  highly,"  Seeker  said,  "  Then  I  will  pay  3^our 
curate  something  extra  out  of  my  own  pocket  "  ;  and 
the  more  unwholesome  the  curate's  cure  the  more 
quickly  was  he  remembered  b\'  the  archbishop  for 
preferment  when  some  ecclesiastical  place  was  a-begging. 

1759  was  a  year  of  victories  for  the  British;  Wolfe 
at  Quebec  in  September,  and  Ferdinand  at  Minden 
about  the  same  time ;  Hawke  wound  up  the  year  with 


1768] 


A  NEW  KING 


277 


a  splendid  defeat  of  the  French  fleet  at  Quiberon  Bay. 
Seeker  writes  to  the  Prime  Minister  on  30th  November 
1759,  how  Providence  is  "  blessing  H.M.'s  army  in  this 
extraordinary  manner  with  one  victory  after  another," 
and  hopes  a  day  or  two  later  he  may  propose  the 
immediate  use  of  a  Collect  of  Thanksgiving  for  our 
late  happy  victory  :  "  a  publick  acknowledgment  will," 
says  he,  "I  am  persuaded  be  extremely  agreeable  to 
the  King  and  expected  by  the  Nation."  ^ 

George  11. 's  health  had  been  failing  for  some  time 
before  his  death  ;  he  said  he  saw  everything  as  through 
crape.  But  on  25th  October  1760  he  died  after  not 
more  than  a  few  minutes'  illness.  It  fell  to  Seeker's 
lot  to  take  part  in  proclaiming  the  new  monarch.  He 
was  indeed  no  stranger  to  the  archbishop,  who,  when 
Rector  of  St.  James',  had  baptized  him.  Seeker  has 
given  an  account  in  some  MS  Court  Papers,^  preserved 
at  Lambeth,  of  his  interview  with  his  new  master  two 
days  after  the  old  King's  death. 

"  The  King,"  he  says,  "  sent  for  me  into  a  room 
where  he  was  alone,  and  told  me  that  as  the  Royal 
Family  was  numerous  and  he  was  unwilling  to  put  in 
any  of  his  brothers  and  leave  out  his  uncle,  and  many 
names  might  hereafter  make  confusion,  he  thought  it 
would  be  best  to  insert  only  the  Princess  Dowager  of 
Wales  in  particular.  I  assented  to  it  ;  and  then  I  took 
the  opportunity  of  assuring  him  of  my  duty  and  best 
services.  He  said  very  graciously  that  he  had  no  doubt 
on  that  head,  and  that  I  was  one  of  his  oldest  acquaint- 
ance, having  baptized  him  on  the  day  he  was  born  after 
once  doubting  whether  he  was  alive,  as  Mrs.  Kennon 
the  midwife  had  often  told  him." 

The  archbishop  reports  another  conversation  on  the 
following  Sunday  : 

"  The  King  hoped  the  proclamation  against  vice 
and  profaneness  would  be  regarded  and  have  a  good 

'  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32879,  S.  219,  272. 
*  Court  Papers  MSS,  Lambeth,  No.  11 30. 


278 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


eflfect.  I  answered  that  such  proclamations  had  been 
apt  to  be  considered  as  matters  of  course,  but  that  his 
example,  I  was  persuaded,  would  give  life  and  vigour  to 
this.  He  replied  that  he  thought  it  was  his  principal 
duty  to  encourage  and  support  religion  and  \'irtue." 

George  11.  was  buried  on  iith  November  in  Henry 
VII. 's  Chapel  at  Westminster  in  the  evening,  the  abbey 
being  lighted  with  numerous  torches.  Seeker  says : 
"  I  went  to  the  great  door  of  Westminster  Hall  in  my 
coach,  which  was  allowed  to  remain  there  all  the  time. 
They  who  walked  first  in  the  procession  filled  the  stalls 
before  they  who  walked  last  came,  so  that  I  and  the 
Lord  Keeper  and  Lord  Privy  Seal,  etc.,  stood  for  some 
time  in  the  middle  of  the  choir,  but  afterwards  we 
went  to  a  bench  in  the  N.E.  corner  and  stayed  there. 
I  got  home  to  Lambeth  at  eleven."  Horace  Walpole  has 
a  horrid  story  of  Newcastle  going  into  hysterics  and 
being  plied  hy  the  archbishop  with  smelling-salts. 

Seeker  gives  an  account  of  his  view  of  the  position 
in  a  letter  to  Dr.  Johnson,  President  of  King's  College, 
New  York.  He  speaks,  perhaps,  with  overmuch  kind- 
ness and  charity  of  the  dead  King.  He  says  :  "  We 
have  lost  our  good  old  King,  a  true  well-wisher  to  his 
people,  and  a  man  of  many  private  virtues.^  His  suc- 
cessor is  a  regular  and  worthy  and  pious  3"oung  man, 
and  hath  declared  himself,  I  am  satisfied,  very  sin- 
cerel}' to  have  the  interest  of  religion  at  heart.  .  .  .  God 
keep  him  in  the  same  mind,  and  bless  his  endeavours. 
He  continues  the  same  ministry  which  his  grand- 
father had  with  as  few  changes  as  possible  ;  and  I  know 
not  whether  this  nation  was  ever  so  much  at  unity  in 
itself  as  it  is  at  present." 

It  was  quite  in  accord  with  Seeker's  tastes  that  he 
should  take,  as  he  did,  a  leading  part  in  searching  the 
precedents  and  settling  the  proper  ceremonial  to  be 
followed  at  the  new  King's  coronation.  Of  course  he 
performed  the  ceremon}'  himself.    There  was  a  difficulty 

1  Chandler's  Life  of  Dr.  Johnson  of  New  York,  i8i. 


Thcmas  Sixker 
(From  the  Painting  by  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds,  P.R.A.) 

[  To  face  p.  278 


1768]        GEORGE  III.'s  CORONATION  279 


whether  the  King  should  take  off  his  crown  when  he 
received  the  Communion.  Seeker  says  :  "At  the 
Communion  the  King  asked  me  if  he  should  not  take 
off  his  crown.  I  said  the  office  did  not  mention  it. 
He  asked  if  it  would  not  be  more  suitable  to  such  an 
act  of  religion.  I  said  'Yes  ';  but  the  Queen's  crown 
could  not  be  taken  off  easily.  When  I  had  put  on  the 
crown,  the  ladies  pinned  it  to  the  Queen's  head-dress 
or  hair.  The  King  then  asked  what  must  be  done? 
I  said  as  the  ladies'  heads  are  used  to  be  covered  it 
would  not  be  regarded  He  put  off  his  crown  im- 
mediately, and  all  the  Peers  that  saw  it  took  off  their 
coronets."  Archbishop  Wake's  MS  directs  both  the  King 
and  Queen  to  take  off  their  crowns .  His  printed  form  does 
not.  Bishop  Newton,  who  was  present  as  a  prebendary, 
gives  a  similar  account.  He  says  that  when  the  young 
King  approached  the  Table  to  receive  the  Communion, 
he  inquired  of  the  archbishop  whether  he  should  not 
lay  aside  his  crown  while  receiving  the  consecrated 
elements.  The  cautious  Seeker  asked  the  Bishop  of 
Rochester,  but  neither  of  them  knew  or  could  say  what 
had  been  the  usual  form.  Thus  they  left  the  point  to 
His  Majesty's  own  judgment.  The  King  determined 
within  himself  that  humility  best  became  such  a  solemn 
act  of  devotion,  and  took  off  his  crown  and  laid  it  aside. 

Seeker  resided  during  almost  the  whole  of  his  archi- 
episcopate  at  Lambeth.  It  is  not  strange  that  to  one 
who  was  nothing  if  not  a  scholar  the  library  at  Lambeth 
was  of  the  greatest  interest.  He  is  said  to  have  spent 
more  than  £300  in  arranging  the  MSS  there,  and  having 
the  old  registers  of  the  see  ^  duly  catalogued.  Finding 
that  since  Tenison's  days  it  had  received  no  additions 
of  new  books,  he  spent  much  money  and  trouble  in 
collecting  books  in  all  languages  from  all  over  Europe 
for  it,^  and  to  it  he  by  his  will  bequeathed  the  greater 

'  Stanley's  Memorials  of  Westminster  Abbey,  loi, 
*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  482. 
8  Allen's  Lambeth,  188, 

19 


28o 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


part  of  his  own  very  valuable  collection  of  books.  Of 
the  religious  wants  of  his  Lambeth  neighbours  he  was 
careful,  giving  £soo,  a  large  sum  in  those  da3^s,  to  build 
a  chapel  at  Stockwell,  in  the  parish  of  Lambeth,  besides 
giving  the  communion  plate  and  what  the  Gentleman's 
Magazine  calls  the  "  furniture  for  the  pulpit  reading- 
desk  and  communion  table." 

To  the  Society  for  Promoting  Christian  Knowledge 
he  was  a  liberal  benefactor.  He  zealously  supported 
the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign 
Parts,  founded  in  1701  by  Dr.  Bray.  Its  beginnings 
were  during  the  first  century  of  its  existence  small. 
Seeker  writes  of  it  to  his  friend  Johnson  of  New  York 
in  1752  :  "  Our  fund  is  reduced  at  present  very  low  ; 
and  the  last  year's  benefactions  have  been  very  small."  ^ 

In  one  sphere  of  its  operations,  the  American 
Colonies,  the  archbishop  took  particular  interest,  being 
a  strong  advocate  for  the  appointment  of  bishops  to 
govern  the  Episcopal  Churches  there.  It  was  indeed 
on  this  question  that  he  met  with  the  largest  measure 
of  abuse  and  invective  that  he  ever  encountered. 

Of  the  thirteen  states,  all  or  nearly  all  on  the  fringe 
of  the  Atlantic,  which  constituted  the  British  Colonies 
destined  to  become  the  United  States,  Virginia  was 
Cavalier  and  High  Church,  New  England  Puritan  and 
Independent,  Maryland  Roman  Catholic,  Pennsylvania 
Quaker.  At  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
Maryland  became  Anglican,  and  it  was  to  Maryland 
that  Dr.  Bray  was  sent  out  by  the  Bishop  of  London 
as  his  commissarJ^  The  story  of  the  Anglican  Church 
in  America  during  the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth 
century  is  one  of  growth  and  development.  Keith, 
the  first  S.P.G.  missionarj^  in  Boston,  laboured  with 
such  zeal  that  in  1703  his  companion  wrote,  "  Churches 
are  going  up  amain  where  there  were  never  an\'  before." 
In  South  Carolina  the  negroes  came  into  the  Church 
in  thousands  ;  by  the  middle  of  the  century  there  were 

*  Chandler's  Life  of  Johnson,  175. 


1768]     AN  EPISCOPATE  FOR  AMERICA  281 


twenty  parishes  in  the  Province  with  settled  clergy, 
and  the  Legislature  allowed  ;^ioo  a  year  stipend  to 
each  clergyman.  In  North  Carolina  the  Church  had  a 
hard  fight  with  the  Quakers  ;  but  in  1732  Boyd,  and  in 
1742  Clement  Hall,  came  over  and  were  ordained  by 
the  Bishop  of  London  for  the  American  ministry. 
Before  this  an  heroic  effort  had  been  made  by  certain 
Fellows  of  Trinity,  Dublin,  under  the  auspices  of  the 
great  Berkeley,  then  Dean  of  Derry,  to  carry  out  a 
proposal  of  his  for  establishing  a  Training  College  at 
Bermuda,  but  Sir  R.  Walpole  played  Berkeley  false 
over  a  grant  he  had  promised,  and  the  scheme  failed. 
In  1748  there  were  in  New  England  thirty-six 
episcopal  clergy. 

With  the  best  of  English  Churchmen,  the  proposal  to 
appoint  bishops  for  America  had  long  found  favour. 
Archbishop  Tenison  by  his  will  left  £1000  to  the  S.P.G. 
towards  founding  two  such  bishoprics  ;  and  thirty  or 
forty  years  later  his  example  in  this  respect  had  been 
followed  by  the  great  Bishop  Butler  of  Durham,  and 
by  Seeker's  great  friend  Benson,  Bishop  of  Gloucester 
Seeker  strongly  favoured  the  proposal,  and  in 
1750-51  addressed  a  letter  on  the  subject  to  Walpole. 
It  was  not  published  during  his  life,  but  pursuant  to  a 
written  direction  left  by  Seeker  was  published  by  his 
executors  .2  The  occasion  of  it  seems  to  have  been 
as  follows  :  Sherlock,  Bishop  of  London  in  1 748,  applied 
to  the  Government  for  the  appointment  of  two  or  three 
bishops  for  the  plantations, keeping  clear  of  New  England, 
where  dissent  was  strong.  Walpole,  always  anxious 
to  keep  the  good-will  of  the  Dissenters,  who  were  especi- 
ally strong  in  his  own  county  of  Norfolk,  rejected  the 
proposal,  and  sent  Seeker  a  copy  of  his  reply  to  Sherlock. 
This  drew  from  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  and  Rector  of 
St.  James',  "  a  letter  to  Walpole  concerning  bishops 
in  America."  The  proposal  it  supported  was  a  modest 
one,  "  that  two  or  three  persons  should  be  ordained 

^  Hore,  ii.  92.  *  See  vol.  vi.  of  Seeker's  woiks. 


282 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


bishops  and  sent  into  our  American  Colonies  to  administer 
Confirmation,  and  to  give  deacons  and  priests  orders 
to  proper  candidates,  and  to  exercise  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  late  Bishop  of  London's  commissaries." 

No  one  was  more  sensible  than  Seeker  of  the  diffi- 
culties in  the  wa}^  There  was,  as  we  have  said,  at  the 
head  of  King's  College,  New  York,  as  its  first  president, 
a  Dr.  Samuel  Johnson,  with  whom  Seeker  maintained 
a  frequent  and  intimate  correspondence.  He  showed 
great  interest  in  Johnson's  College,  discussing  with 
its  president  the  merits  of,  and  himself  interviewing, 
candidates  in  England  for  professorships  and  tutorships 
there.^  In  a  letter  to  Johnson,  wTitten  in  February 
1752,  nearly  one  and  a  half  years  after  his  letter  to 
Walpole,  he  sa^^s  :  "  Concerning  the  important  scheme  of 
establishing  bishops  abroad,  I  can  at  present  give  no 
encouraging  prospect  .  .  .  indeed,  religion  continues 
to  decay  most  lamentabh- ." 

And  Seeker  had  a  good  case.  As  he  pointed  out, 
the  Church  of  England  is  in  its  constitution  episcopal ; 
the  episcopal  clergy  being  numerous  needed  supervision 
at  a  less  distance  than  3000  miles.  Thej^  would  need 
ordained  successors,  and  candidates  for  the  ministry-- 
should  be  saved  the  "  trouble,  cost,  and  hazard  "  of 
coming  to  England  for  ordination.  Granted  that  there 
were  saints  and  heroes  among  those  ministering  in 
America,  and  that  Seeker's  description  in  his  letter 
to  Walpole  of  them  as  "  men  of  desperate  fortunes, 
low  qualifications,  bad  and  doubtful  characters,  and  a 
great  part  of  them  Scotch  Jacobites,  was  exaggerated 
and  cynical  " — there  was  a  tendency  for  black  sheep 
to  come  in  where  there  was  no  shepherd's  correcting 
hand. 

There  were  to  be  no  Lord  Bishops,  only  chief  Pastors, 
and  none  except  in  episcopal  colonies. 

One  of  the  points  put  forward  is  of  interest  to  us 
twentieth-century  folk,  who  start  to  cross  the  Atlantic 

^  Chandler's  Life  of  Johnson,  175. 


1768]      NONCONFORMIST  OPPOSITION  283 


in  monster,  floating  hotels,  making  less  of  it  than  our 
grandfathers  did  of  going  to  Bath  in  a  postchaise.  It 
was  alleged  that  of  those  who  crossed  the  Atlantic  to 
obtain  ordination,  near  a  fifth  part  had  actually  lost 
their  lives  on  the  voyage.  They  were  also  found  to  be 
especially  susceptible  to  smallpox  when  they  arrived  in 
England. 

But  there  was  a  violent  opposition  from  Dissenters 
both  in  England  and  America.    And  at  home  the  Broad 
Churchmen  backed  up  this  opposition.    It  would  have 
been  strange  if  the  American  Dissenters  had  not  been 
frightened  at  the  suggestion  to  introduce  bishops  into 
the  land  to  which  their  fathers  had  banished  themselves 
in  quest  of  religious  freedom.    All  the  worst  features  of 
Episcopacy  at  its  worst  were   conjured   up  by  the 
alarmed  imagination  of  the  Dissenters  ;  Peer  prelates 
carrying  with  them  pomp  and  palaces,  ecclesiastical 
courts  claiming  jurisdiction  in  matrimonial  and  testa- 
mentary matters,  the  exaltation  of  the  Church  over  the 
Nonconformist  communities  and  vigorous  proselytising 
from  these  communities.     All  these  were  read  into  the 
proposal.    A  Dr.  Mayhew,  a  Congregational  minister 
in  Boston,  was  a  Protagonist  against  having  bishops 
in  America.    He  published  a  pamphlet  of  much  bitter- 
ness against  the  promoters  of  the  scheme,  the  S.P.G.  in 
particular.    He   inveighed   against   bishops   as   "  the 
mitred,  lordly  successors  of  the  fishermen  of  Galilee." 

To  this  pamphlet  Seeker  published  a  lengthy  reply. 
He  writes  to  Johnson  on  the  19th  March  1754  his  desire 
that  "  the  ministers  of  our  Church  in  America  by 
friendly  converse  with  the  principal  Dissenters  could 
satisfy  them  that  nothing  more  is  intended  than  that  our 
Church  may  enjoy  the  full  benefit  of  its  own  institutions, 
as  all  others  do.  For  so  long  as  they  are  uneasy  and 
remonstrate  regard  will  be  paid  to  them  and  their 
friends  here  by  our  Ministers  of  State."  1  Mayhew  had 
to  admit  that  if  what  was  intended  was   only  what 

*  Chandler's  Life  of  Johnson,  1 76. 


284 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


Secker  put  forward,  his  strictures  were  too  severe.  But 
great  bitterness  was  roused  against  Seeker  for  his  atti- 
tude on  this  question. 

Blackburne  poured  his  utmost  contempt  on  the 
plan  of  sending  bishops  to  America,  calHng  it  "  a  mere 
empty,  chimerical  vision."  If  episcopal  ministrations 
be  vital  to  the  Church,  why  were  they  so  omitted  in 
England?  How,  for  instance,  could  Confirmation  be 
really  indispensable  when  "  in  several  dioceses  there  are 
no  Confirmations  for  several  years  "  ?  Blackburne  had 
a  great  friend,  Thomas  Hollis,  who  had  been  an  admirer 
of  Seeker,  but  who  took  up  the  cudgels  against  him  on 
the  American  bishops'  question.  Hollis  seems  to  have 
been  a  queer  person  of  independent  means  ;  he  was,  and 
advertised  himself  as  being,  of  "  Whig  if  not  republican 
principles."  Boswell,  in  his  Life  of  Johnson,  iv.  52, 
speaks  of  him  as  "  the  strenuous  Whig  who  used  to 
send  over  Europe  presents  of  democratical  books  with 
their  boards  stamped  with  daggers  and  caps  of  liberty." 
He  devoted  himself  to  literature  and  was  a  liberal 
benefactor  to,  amongst  other  institutions,  Harvard 
University.  Blackburne  published  a  Memoir  of  him, 
which  shows  that  though  he  attended  no  church  he  was 
"  a  man  of  unusual  piety."  He  was  at  one  time  an 
admirer  if  not  a  friend  of  Seeker,"  and  presented  him, 
while  Bishop  of  Oxford,  with  a  head  of  Socrates  in  green 
jasper ;  but  over  this  question  of  bishops  for  America 
he  waxed  furious,  and  charged  Seeker  in  a  letter  to 
Mayhew  with  leaving  popery  untouched,  with  perse- 
cuting one  Annet,  with  showing  no  affection  to  liberty, 
but  "  treading  with  glee  the  mitred  court  paths." 
These  charges  are  without  proof.  Annet  was  an 
atheistical  schoolmaster  who  for  a  book  called  Free 
Enquirer  was  sent  to  Newgate.  Seeker  had  no  hand  in 
the  prosecution, 1  and  is  said  to  have  relieved  the 
necessities  of  Annet  while  in  prison.  Seeker,  however, 
continued  to  the  end  of  his  life  to  take  the  greatest 

*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  in.  480. 


1768]  A  PREBEND  INSTEAD  OF  A  HOUSE  285 


interest  in  and  press  for,  with  all  the  powers  at  his  com- 
mand, the  suggested  appointment  of  some  bishops  in 
America.  But  the  eagerness  and  piety  of  many  of  the 
Nonconformists  of  the  day,  if  nothing  else,  gave  them 
power,  and  they  did  not  like  the  step.  So  the  struggle 
was  long,  and  many  and  many  a  time  Seeker  had  to 
advise  perseverance  as  well  as  patience.  As  late  as 
1763  we  find  him  writing  to  Johnson,  "  We  must  try 
our  utmost  for  bishops.  Hitherto  little  has  been  said 
to  ministers  and  less  by  them  on  the  subject." 

The  approach  of  the  war  with  the  United  States 
made  any  prospect  of  appointing  bishops  for  America 
hopeless.  Seeker  could  get  after  "  earnest  and  con- 
tinued endeavours  "  nothing  but  promises  to  consider 
and  confer  about  the  matter.  The  King  favoured  the 
scheme, 1  and  suggested  sending  a  bishop  to  Quebec  if 
other  places  were  objected  to. 

Bishop  Porteous  says  :  "  Posterity  will  stand  amazed 
when  they  are  told  that  on  this  account  his  memory 
has  been  pursued  in  pamphlets  and  newspapers  with 
such  unrelenting  rancour,  such  unexampled  wanton- 
ness of  abuse  as  he  would  scarce  have  deserved  had  he 
attempted  to  eradicate  Christianity  out  of  America,  and 
to  introduce  Mahometanism  in  its  room." 

We  must  not  expect  even  in  so  good  a  man  as  Seeker 
was  perfect  freedom  from  an  eighteenth-century  view 
of  Church  patronage — something  out  of  which  you  were 
justified  in  providing  for  those  of  your  own  household 
if  not  bound  so  to  do. 

On  the  31st  March  1761  he  writes  to  Newcastle  to 
ask  for  a  prebend,  one  of  nine  belonging  to  the  King, 
for  his  brother's  son.  "  I  have,"  he  says,  "  no  house 
or  lodging  at  Canterbury,  and  yet  am  expected  to 
entertain  much  company  in  a  very  expensive  manner 
when  I  am  there.  For  these  reasons  I  presume  it  hath 
been  usual  for  the  Crown  to  indulge  the  archbishops 
with  leave  to  recommend  to  a  vacant  place  in  the  Church. 

*  Chandler's  Life  of  Johnson,  199. 


286 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


Archbishop  Wake  obtained  the  Deanery  for  his  son-in- 
law,  and  Archbishop  Potter  a  prebend  for  his  son."^ 

But  Seeker  was  not  without  conscience  in  patronage 
matters.  He  could  even  dare  to  say  "  No  "  to  his  omni- 
potent friend  Newcastle.  The  latter  wrote  to  tell  him 
his  relative,  James  Cornwallis,  brother  to  Seeker's 
successor  at  Canterbury,  wanted  a  Fellowship  at  Merton. 
Newcastle  gave  as  his  reason,  "  My  niece.  Lady  Corn- 
wallis, and  her  son,  my  Lord  Cornwallis,  have  acted 
towards  me  with  so  much  regard  and  affection." 
Seeker  replied  that  as  Visitor  of  Merton  it  would  be 
improper  for  him  "  to  recommend  any  one  for  a  fellow- 
ship." 2 

It  must  have  been  with  all  his  heart  that  Seeker 
took  up  the  task  of  contradicting  the  report  published 
in  a  pamphlet  in  1 767  that  the  great  Bishop  Butler  had 
died  a  Roman  Catholic.  In  three  articles  in  the 
Gentleman's  Magazine  signed  "  Misopseudes,"  Seeker 
denied  the  truth  of  the  report,  and  his  denial  seems  to 
have  been  ultimately  accepted. 

Though  he  was  charged  by  his  enemies  with  being 
a  hanger-on  of  the  Court,  and  of  course  knew  the  young 
King  George  iii.  better  than  his  grandfather,  according 
to  Bishop  Newton  he  was  never  very  acceptable  at 
Court .3  On  George  iii.'s  accession  twenty  new  chaplains 
were  appointed,  and,  contrary  to  established  practice, 
without  consulting  the  Primate.  Seeker's  friends 
would  have  had  him  demur  :  but,  according  to  Bishop 
Newton,  he  thought  his  opportunities  for  doing  good 
in  the  future  would  be  diminished,  not  augmented, 
should  he  have  a  breeze  with  the  new  monarch  ;  and 
he  complained  not.  At  any  rate  his  more  personal 
knowledge  of  the  new  King  as  well  as  a  more  congenial 
moral  atmosphere  made  Seeker  come  to  Court  more 
often  than  in  the  old  King's  days.    Lord  Mahon  says 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32921,  f.  236. 
^  Uhi  supra,  32949,  ff.  391,  401. 
'  Newton's  Life  and  Anecdotes,  117. 


/ 


1768]   APPEAL  ACtAINST  MASQUERADES  287 

it  was  "  observed  with  satisfaction  that  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  proud  of  so  promising  a  pupil,  and 
having  no  longer  a  Lady  Yarmouth  to  encounter,  had 
become  frequent  in  attendance  at  Court."  ^ 

We  have  recorded  in  Archbishop  Wake's  Life  how  in 
1725  a  protest  against  the  masked  balls  or  "  masquer- 
ades "  that  were  held  in  London  was  made  to  George  i. 
Lord  Mahon  records  that  London  was  so  frightened 
by  the  Lisbon  earthquake  in  1752  that  masquerades 
were  given  up.    It  seems,  however,  that  they  survived 
in  sufficient  strength  to  shock  pious  minds,  and  in  1766 
an  energetic  appeal  was  made  to  Archbishop  Seeker 
about  them.    Some  passages  from  the  appeal  are  worth 
quoting.     After  referring  to  the  archbishop  as  being 
both  from  his  position  and  virtues  "  the  natural  patron 
of  the  following  Proposal  "which  is  to  help  "  to  check, 
and  if  your  Grace's  wise  deliberations  may  be  further 
improved,  to  remedy  all  or  any  of  the  evils  resulting 
from  the  too  frequent  resort  of  the  middling  and  lower 
class  of  people  to  public  diversions  which  in  the  general 
opinion   are  but   real    allurements    to   idleness  and 
vice.  .  .  ."    "  To  support  these  modish  entertainments 
great  numbers  of  both  these  classes  squander  away  their 
time,  health,  and  substance."    The  appeal  goes  on  to 
suggest,  as  a  remedy,  to  oblige  "  the  proprietors  of 
all  licensed  and  unlicensed  diversions  whether  balls, 
masquerades,  operas,  plays,  concerts,  amphitheatres, 
breakfastings,  etc.,  throughout  the  Kingdom  to  hold 
them  by  tickets  stamped  by  authority,  and  over  and 
above  the  usual  prices  that  a  tax  be  laid  on  each 
ticket  according  to  its  present  value  not  exceeding 
four  shillings  in  the  pound."    "  For  London  it  is  esti- 
mated this  would  produce  over  ;^20,ooo  a  year,  which 
might  be  given  to  the  Foundling  Hospital,"  between 
which  and  the  Masquerades  the  appeal  sees  a  con- 
nection .2    How  Seeker  responded  to  the  appeal  we 
have  not  been  able  to  ascertain. 

•  Mahon's  His<o>')',  iv.  210.  ^Gentleman'!;  Magazine,  xxxviii.  523. 


288 


THOMAS  SECKER  [i7S8- 


Secker's  attitude  to  the  revival  of  Convocation  is 
not  easy  to  define.  "  I  spoke  to  Lord  Hardwicke,"  he 
writes  to  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  on  the  19th  October 
1761,  "  some  time  ago  about  the  Convocation,  who 
agreed  perfectly  with  your  Grace  in  the  opinion  that  I 
ought  to  have  some  proper  notification  of  His  Majesty's 
pleasure  upon  the  question  of  laying  Heads  of  Business 
before  that  assembly."  ^ 

But  there  was  a  synodical  meeting  of  the  clergy  at  the 
beginning  of  George  iii.'s  reign,  and  for  it  Seeker  pre- 
pared an  oratio  synodalis,  though  he  was  too  ill  to 
attend  the  meeting.  In  this  he  says  that  the  nature 
of  the  time  and  the  position  of  affairs  are  not  realised 
by  those  who  favour  the  revival  of  Convocation.  The 
Deists,  infidels,  Romanists,  and  Dissenters  would  strive 
for  confusion  :  if  they  did  little  their  inactivity  would 
be  derided,  if  they  did  much  all  men  would  fear  their 
restlessness  and  love  of  change.  Many,  and  those  not 
unwise  persons,  think,  and  will  always  think,  that  had 
Convocation  met  and  put  forward  a  judicious  utterance 
on  such  points  as  Conversion  or  Personal  Assurance 
many  Methodists  might  have  been  retained  for  the 
Church  :  for  1760  first  saw  Wesley's  preachers  taking 
out  licences  as  Dissenting  preachers  and  to  administer 
the  Sacraments,  and  Charles  wrote  to  John  Wesley  : 
"  We  are  come  to  the  Rubicon."  It  was  a  critical  time. 
Dis  aliter  visum. 

Seeker  maintained  his  intimacy  and  a  constant 
correspondence  with  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  after  the 
death  of  Lord  Hardwicke  in  March  1764,  and  seems 
to  have  been  employed  in  the  summer  of  1765  to  assist 
in  the  arrangements  which  were  being  made  for  forming 
the  Cabinet  of  Lord  Rockingham,  under  whom  New- 
castle returned  to  office  as  Privy  Seal. 

It  was  desired  to  appoint  the  unhappy  Charles  Yorke 
to  office.  Seeker  was  employed  to  get  over  his  scruples. 
The  archbishop  writes  from  Lambeth  at  eleven  o'clock 

>Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32929,  f.  377. 


1768]  PITT  AND  ROCKINGHAM 


289 


at  night,  on  the  12th  July  1765,  to  Newcastle  and 
reports  a  long  conversation  with  Mr.  Yorke.  What  the 
archbishop  said  had  made  "  a  considerable  impression 
on  him,  though  acceptance  would  be  attended  with 
some  disagreeable  circumstances — -but  he  must  have  a 
little  more  time  to  consider."^ 

Seeker  seems  to  have  shared  the  suspicions  which 
almost  all  the  statesmen  of  the  day  felt  about  the  elder 
Pitt.  The  latter  did  not  form  his  short-lived  Cabinet 
till  July  1766,  but  for  months  before  this  the  Ministry 
of  Lord  Rockingham,  under  whom  Pitt  would  not  serve, 
was  in  difficulties  with  the  King.  On  the  i6th  February 
1766,  in  reply  to  a  letter  of  Newcastle,  who  spoke  of 
Mr.  Pitt's  assistance  and  service  as  absolutely  necessary, 
the  archbishop  writes  : 

"  How  many  more  caprices  he  (Pitt)  may  have 
private  and  publick  if  he  gets  into  power  again  no  one 
can  foresee.  But  he  hath  shown  abundantly  formerly 
and  of  late  that  nothing  less  than  full  power  will  suffice 
him — and  I  dread  to  think  what  in  that  plenitude  he 
may  attempt.  .  .  .  His  passions  and  his  haughtiness 
are  such  that  I  doubt  whether  he  himself  can  be  sure 
of  what  he  will  do." 

The  Rockingham  Ministry  repealed  the  Stamp  Act 
which  Lord  Grenville  had  passed  in  1765,  and  which 
caused  such  fury  in  the  American  Colonies.  Seeker 
approved  the  repeal,  though  he  does  not  seem  to  have 
taken  a  very  clear  or  far-seeing  view  on  the  American 
question,  and  writes  on  the  2nd  February  1766  :  "  The 
dangerous  consequences  of  the  Stamp  Act  appear  so 
much  more  plainly  now  than  they  did  when  it  was 
passed." 

During  the  last  ten  years  of  his  life  Seeker  suffered 
much  from  bad  health.  The  gout  attacked  him  often 
and  badly.  He  writes  to  Johnson  in  December  1761  : 
"  I  have  had  a  severe  fit  of  the  stone,  and  am  now  under 
a  second  fit  of  the  gout  within  these  six  months  "  ;  and 

lAddl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32967,  f.  361. 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[I7S8- 


a  year  and  a  half  later  to  the  same  correspondent,  on 
1 8th  August  1762  :  "  I  have  had  the  gout  near  three 
months  in  my  right  hand,  which  is  still  very  weak  and 
stiff,  and  it  hath  now  seized  my  left  and  I  write  in  great 
pain." 

Two  years  later  he  writes  that  the  gout  had 
seized  both  his  hands  and  both  his  feet.  "  It  made," 
says  he,  "  several  attacks  on  my  right  hand,  and  dis- 
abled me  from  making  almost  any  use  of  it  for  two  or 
three  months."  His  gout  increased  greatly  in  the 
following  years  of  his  life,  and  the  attacks  after  they 
passed  off  left  him  with  rheumatic  pains  of  great 
severity.  He  seems  also  to  have  suffered  again  from 
stone,  and  recovered  with  difficulty  from  an  attack 
of  it  in  January  1767. 

A  sharp  attack  of  gout  in  the  winter  of  1766-7 
left  him  with  a  pain  in  his  shoulder.  This  lasted  a 
twelvemonth  and  the  pain  then  shifted  to  the  opposite 
thigh.  Here  it  was  almost  continuous,  and  of  great 
severity,  and  as  it  hindered  his  taking  exercise  the  poor 
archbishop  declined  rapidly  in  health.  He  was  extra- 
ordinarily patient  and  cheerful  before  his  family,  but  to 
his  physicians  he  complained  of  pains  so  excruciating 
that  he  thought  it  would  be  impossible  to  support 
them  long. 

He  says  in  a  letter  to  Newcastle  from  Lambeth, 
dated  the  26th  May  1767  :  "I  am  not  able  and  have 
not  been  able  for  some  sessions  past  to  bear  the  heat 
and  the  fatigue  of  long  days  in  the  House  of  Lords."  ^ 
And  in  a  letter  two  months  later  calls  his  suggestions 
"  the  low-spirited  imaginations  of  a  man  in  very  great 
pain."  2 

On  the  28th  January  1768  he  says  :  "  I  am  obliged 
to  give  a  worse  account  of  myself.  I  am  lifted  into  and 
out  of  my  Bed  by  four  men."  ^  The  Duke  of  Grafton  of 
"  lounging  opinions,"  whom  we  shall  say  something  of 

*  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32982,  f.  138.        ^  jyjj  supra,  32983,  f.  242. 

•  Ubi  supra,  32988,  f.  loi. 


1768] 


DEATH 


291 


in  Cornwallis'  Life,  had  become  Premier,  and  the  poor 
archbishop  complains  that  he  had  never  asked  him  a 
single  question  or  "  communicated  to  him  a  single  in- 
tention or  even  actual  Disposition  relative  to  ecclesiastical 
affairs." 

On  the  13th  July  1768  he  writes  from  Lambeth  to 
Dr.  Nathaniel  Lardner,  the  Nonconformist  divine,  a 
letter  in  which  he  says  : 

"  It  hath  pleased  God  to  afflict  me  for  many  months 
with  so  constant  and  severe  a  pain  in  one  of  my  hips 
that  I  am  almost  incapable  of  attention  to  anything 
else.  Become  quite  useless  and  almost  worn  out,  I 
beg  you  will  pray  God  to  give  me  patience  and  such 
degree  of  ease  as  He  shall  think  fit  :  and  can  only  add 
that  as  I  hope  my  spirit  is  truly  Christian  towards  all 
who  love  the  Lord  Jesus  in  sincerity  so  I  am  with 
particular  esteem  and  thankfulness  for  the  whole  of 
your  obliging  behaviour  to  me  through  life. — Yr 
faithful  friend  and  servant, 

"  Thomas  Cant." 

On  Saturday  the  30th  July  1768  he  was  seized  with 
sickness  while  at  dinner.  On  the  evening  of  the  follow- 
ing Sunday,  while  lying  on  his  couch  and  being  attended 
by  his  doctors  and  servants,  he  suddenly  cried  out  that 
his  thigh  bone  was  broken. 

He  lay  in  great  agony  for  some  time.  Attempt  was 
made  to  set  the  bone,  but  without  substantial  benefit 
to  the  patient.  He  fell  into  a  kind  of  delirium  on  the 
Tuesday  following,  with  some  ease  of  the  pain,  and 
passed  away  about  five  on  the  Wednesday  afternoon, 
A  post-mortem  examination  showed  that  the  thigh  bone 
was  carious,  its  substance  being  almost  destroyed  in 
parts  by  the  disease.  Hence  the  excruciating  pains  he 
had  experienced. 

Seeker  was  seventy-five  when  he  died.  He  was 
buried  by  his  own  desire  in  a  covered  passage  leading 
from  the  garden  door  of  the  Palace  to  the  north  door  of 
Lambeth  Church.    He  expressly  forbade  any  monument 


292 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


or  epitaph  to  be  put  up  for  him  anywhere.  A  black 
marble  slab  with  the  simple  inscription, 

THOMAS  SECKER, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
Died  Aug.  5,  1768,  aged  75, 

marks  his  last  resting-place. 

Seeker's  will  is  of  interest.  He  appointed  as  his 
executors,  Dr.  Burton,  a  scholarly  friend  and  Canon  of 
Christ  Church,  and  Mrs.  Talbot,  his  wife's  friend,  who 
with  her  daughter  had  been,  as  we  have  said,  from  his 
marriage  for  forty-two  years  inmates  of  his  house  and 
members  of  his  family.  For  these  two  ladies,  the 
younger  of  whom  did  not  long  survive  him,  he  provided 
by  vesting  13,000  Consols  in  his  two  chaplains,  one  of 
whom.  Dr.  Beilby  Porteous,  was  his  biographer  and 
afterwards  Bishop  of  London,  in  trust  for  the  benefit  of 
the  two  ladies  and  the  survivor  of  them.  When  they 
were  both  dead  he  gave  the  fund  in  charity.  The  dis- 
positions of  the  will  included,  among  others,  ;£iooo  to 
S.P.G.  for  general  purposes. 

£1000  to  S.P.G.  for  establishing  a  bishop  or  bishops 
in  America. 

£Soo  to  the  S.P.C.K. 

;^5oo  to  each  of  the  archbishop's  three  hospitals, 
viz.  :  Croydon,  St.  John  at  Canterbury,  and 
St.  Nicholas  at  Harbledon. 
To  St.  George's  and  the  London  Hospital  and  the 
Lying-in  Hospitals  ;£5oo  each,  and  £300  each  to  the 
Magdalen  Hospital,  the  Lock  Hospital,  and  the  Small- 
pox and  Inoculation  Hospital.     The  list  winds  up 
with  £2000  towards  repairing  and  rebuilding  the  Houses 
belonging  to  Poor  Livings  in  the  Diocese  of  Canterbury. 

His  gifts  to  the  library  at  Lambeth  we  have 
mentioned.  Bishop  Porteous,  who  as  chaplain  must 
have  had  opportunities  of  judging,  records  that  Seeker 
set  a  very  good  example  to  the  flock  under  him  by  his 
treatment  of  his  household  and  domestic  servants : 
many  of  them,  we  are  told,  he  suffered  to  continue  with 


1768] 


HIS  CRITICS 


293 


their  families  in  his  house  after  they  were  married. 
None  of  them  were  discharged  on  account  of  sickness 
or  infirmity,  but  were  assisted  with  the  best  advice  that 
could  be  had  at  a  great  yearly  expense.  By  his  will  he 
left  ;^iooo — a  large  sum  in  those  days — to  be  distributed 
amongst  his  servants,  besides  £200  to  such  indigent 
persons  as  he  had  assisted  in  his  lifetime.  The  last 
sermon  he  preached  was  at  Stockwell  Chapel  in  the  parish 
of  Lambeth,  to  which,  as  we  have  said,  he  had  been  a 
very  great  benefactor. 

To  Seeker  must  be  assigned  a  very  high,  if  not  the 
highest,  place  among  the  English  primates  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  With  the  exception  possibly  of 
Wake  and  Tenison  he  was  the  ablest  and  best  of  them. 

He  had  critics,  perhaps  we  should  say  enemies  ; 
as  what  man,  certainly  what  good  man,  in  a  prominent 
place  has  not?  Among  them  were  Thomas  Hollis, 
whose  attitude  towards  Seeker  we  have  already  dealt 
with,  Horace  Walpole,  Francis  Blackburne,  William 
King,  Principal  of  St.  Mary  Hall,  a  strange  man  of 
Jacobite  sympathies,  who  delivered  a  Latin  oration 
at  the  opening  of  the  Radcliffe  Library  at  Oxford  in 
1749,  and  published  in  his  old  age  a  book  of  "  political 
and  literary  anecdotes  of  his  own  times."  He  disliked 
Presbyterians,  and  spoke  against  Seeker  and  also 
Chandler,  Bishop  of  London,  who  are,  he  says,  "  both 
converts  from  presbytery.  They  are  frequent  preachers," 
he  goes  on,  "  but  the  cant  of  their  education  renders 
their  discourses  very  disagreeable  to  a  good  ear.  Their 
parts  are  moderate,  and  nearly  equal  ;  but  their 
characters  are  very  different."^  He  then  goes  on  to 
praise  Chandler.  But  this  criticism  seems  accounted 
for  by  dislike  of  one  who  started  life  as  a  Nonconformist  ; 
and  the  fact  that  he  finds  fault  with  Seeker's  sermons 
— his  strongest  point — makes  the  criticism  of  little 
weight.  Gilbert  Wakefield  calls  Seeker  "  an  imperious 
and  persecuting  prelate,"  but,  as  Dr.  Stoughton 
'  King's  Anecdotes,  p.  xiv. 


294 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


remarks,  he  and  King  "are  prejudiced  witnesses."^ 
According  to  Horace  Walpole,  Seeker  was  a  syco- 
phant, a  hanger-on  to  princes  and  potentates  royal 
and  otherwise,  of  the  world  worldly.  Even  so  good 
a  man  as  Bishop  Hurd  in  his  Life  of  Warburton  decries 
him.  But  the  testimony  of  Walpole  is  not  to  be  relied 
on,  as  we  have  shown  elsewhere.  The  sneer  that  his  Act 
Sermon  was  without  citations  of  Scripture  may  be 
admitted  :  this,  however,  may  be  accounted  for  by  the 
special  subject  of  the  discourse  ;  if  intended  to  mean  that 
his  sermons  generally  were  so,  it  is  untrue.  In  one 
of  his  published  sermons  taken  by  chance  the  writer 
found  twenty-five  quotations  from  Scripture,  in  another 
fifteen.  Of  Bishop  Hurd's  criticism  of  Seeker  the  follow- 
ing is  a  histor}^  In  1738  Warburton,  the  great  contro- 
versialist and  Defender  of  Christianity,  afterwards  Bishop 
of  Gloucester,  published  his  Divine  Legation  of  Moses, 
the  thesis  of  which  was  that  the  absence  from  the 
Mosaic  precepts  of  any  future  state  of  reward  and  punish- 
ment proved  those  precepts  to  be  of  Divine  origin. 
Warburton  was  a  widely  read  man,  of  almost  cumbrous 
learning  ;  but  his  spirituality  was  small  and  his  ideas 
on  Church  matters  on  a  low  and  inadequate  level  ; 
and  his  combativeness  was  tremendous.  Dr.  Johnson 
says  :  "  Warburton  by  extending  his  abuse  rendered  it 
ineffectual."  2  Hurd  was  a  man  of  a  more  genial  kind,  but 
he  owed  his  advancement  to  Warburton  and  became  his 
champion.  Canon  Perry  ^  suggests  that  some  of  the  apo- 
logetics for  Christianity  of  Warburton  and  his  like  did 
more  harm  than  good.  Certainly  the  Divine  Legation 
found  many  critics.  Seeker,  in  his  usual  exhaustive 
style,  published  some  notes  on  the  book  ;  Warburton 
reprinted  the  Divine  Legation  in  1758,  a  year  or  two 
before  his  elevation  to  the  episcopate,  with  answers  to 
these  or  such  of  them  as  he  thought  deserving  of  answer. 
It  is  these  notes  which  Bishop  Hurd  has  thought  fit  to 

'  Religion  in  England  under  Queen  Anne  and  the  Georges,  i.  262. 
^Boswell's  Johnson,  v.  69.  ^History  of  English  Church,  m.  37. 


1768] 


HIS  CHARACTER 


295 


insert  in  his  Life  of  Warburton,  prefixed  to  the  voluminous 
edition  of  Warburton's  works.  "  Dr.  Seeker,"  he  says, 
"  was  a  wise  man,  an  edifying  preacher,  and  an  exem- 
plary bishop.  But  the  course  of  his  life  and  studies 
had  not  qualified  him  to  decide  on  such  a  work  as  that 
of  the  Divine  Legation.  Even  in  the  narrow  walk  of 
literature  he  most  affected,  that  of  criticizing  the  Hebrew 
text,  it  does  not  appear  that  he  attained  to  any  great 
distinction.  His  chief  merit  (and  surely  it  was  a  very 
great  one)  lay  in  explaining  clearly  and  popularly  in 
his  sermons  the  principles  delivered  by  his  friend 
Bishop  Butler  in  his  famous  book  of  the  Analogy,  and 
in  shewing  the  importance  of  them  to  religion."  ^  It 
must  be  remembered  that  Dr.  Lowth,  Bishop  of 
London,  whom  Mr.  Hore  calls  "  a  Prelate,  equalled  by 
few,  and  surpassed  by  none  of  his  time,"^  certainly 
proved  by  his  work  on  Isaiah  to  have  been  a  very 
learned  divine — perhaps  because  he  had  fallen  foul  of 
Warburton — is  criticised  and  vilified  by  Hurd.  Seeker 
was  a  good  Hebrew  scholar,  and  was  acknowledged  as 
such  not  only  by  Lowth,  but  by  Kennicott  and  Merrick, 
and  on  the  whole  Hurd's  criticism  is  not  worthy  of 
much  attention. 

In  personal  appearance  Seeker's  biographers  de- 
scribe him  as  "  tall  and  comely,"  in  early  life  slender 
and  rather  consumptive.  But  in  later  life  he  gained 
in  portliness,  though  "  never  to  a  degree  of  corpulency 
that  was  disproportionate  or  troublesome."  If  Sir 
Joshua  Reynolds'  picture  at  Lambeth  is  to  be  trusted, 
his  expression  was  genial  and  intelligent.  But  his 
biographers  have  to  admit  "  that  he  was  not  always 
equally  affable  and  obliging."  He  was  sometimes 
reserved  and  cold.^  It  is  fair  to  remark  that  there 
are  persons  towards  whom  an  attitude  of  this  character 
in  a  Primate  would  be  appropriate.  Those  who  fell  foul 
of  Seeker  charged  him  with  pride.  His  biographers,  who 

•  See  Life  of  Warburton,  i.  69.  *  Hore,  i.  594. 

'  Porteous'  Life  of  Seeker,  p.  IxL 

20 


296 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


as  his  chaplains  knew  him  well,  attribute  his  hauteur  to 
very  different  causes,  sometimes  to  bodily  pain,  which 
he  often  felt  when  he  did  not  own  it,  sometimes  to 
fatigue,  sometimes  to  "  accidental  uneasiness  arising  in 
the  course  of  business." 

The  Gentleman's  Magazine,  of  contemporary  accounts, 
is  too  flattering  to  be  as  useful  as  it  might.    It  says  : 

"  His  Grace's  person  was  tall  and  graceful  ;  his 
countenance  open  and  benevolent  ;  his  conversation 
cheerful,  entertaining,  and  instructive  ;  his  temper 
even  and  humane.  He  was  kind  and  steady  to  his 
friends,  liberal  to  his  dependants,  a  generous  protector 
of  virtue  and  learning.  He  performed  all  the  sacred 
functions  of  his  calling  with  a  dignity  and  devotion 
that  affected  all  who  heard  him.  He  was  a  most 
laborious  and  useful  parish  priest,  a  vigilant  and  active 
bishop,  and  presided  over  the  Church  in  a  manner  that 
did  equal  honour  to  his  abilities  and  his  heart.  He 
was  particularly  eminent  as  a  plain,  pathetic,  practical 
preacher  ;  and  well  knowing  the  great  ability  of  so 
excellent  a  talent  he  was  not  sparmg  in  the  exercise 
of  it,  but  continued  preaching  and  catechising  whenever 
his  health  would  permit  him  to  the  latest  period  of  his 
life." 

As  we  have  stated,  his  more  violent  critics  hint  that 
Seeker  was  a  humbug.  There  are  weight}^  facts  on 
the  other  side.  Martin  Benson,  Bishop  of  Gloucester, 
would  be  counted  a  saintly  man  in  any  age ;  it  is 
unlikely  that  his  lifelong  bosom  friend  should  be  a 
religious  humbug.  May  not  the  same  be  said  in 
respect  to  the  friendship  between  Seeker  and  the 
great  Bishop  Butler?  Seeker's  friend,  chaplain,  and 
biographer,  Porteous  was  a  man  of  piety  and  the 
highest  goodness  and  no  fool  withal.  His  panegyric 
of  Seeker  may  be  so  universal  as  to  make  it  difficult 
for  a  critical  mind  not  to  discount  his  estimate  some- 
where, and  to  some  extent.  But  it  would  be  impossible 
for  Porteous  to  have  written  of  Seeker  as  he  has  if  the 
archbishop  were  the  faulty  person  his  enemies  would 
have  us  account  him. 


1768] 


KENNICOTT 


297 


He  was  a  scholar  and  the  friend  and  patron  of 
scholars.  Of  the  Latin  that  he  had  read  as  a  young 
man  enough  remained  to  enable  him,  after  forty  years' 
disuse,  and  when  nearly  seventy,  to  compose  a  Latin 
oration  for  Convocation  when  it  met  in  1761  to  present 
an  address  to  the  new  King. 

He  was  the  first  promoter  and  throughout  a  liberal 
supporter  of  Dr.  Kennicott's  learned  Collation  of  the 
Hebrew  Manuscripts  of  the  Old  Testament.  Newcastle 
had  written  to  the  archbishop  about  the  work  of 
Kennicott,  who  applied  for  help  from  the  Government. 
Seeker  replies  :  "  His  scheme  is  to  compare  exactly 
together  all  the  MSS  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  which  are  at 
Oxford  and  Cambridge  and  in  the  British  Museum, 
amounting  at  least  to  one  hundred  and  ten,  in  order  to 
the  publication  of  a  more  accurate  text.  A  work  of 
this  kind  hath  been  long  desired  by  the  friends  of 
Religion  and  Learning  throughout  Europe."  After 
mentioning  Father  Houbiganti's  work,  he  says  :  "  But 
Dr.  Kennicott's  if  completed  will  outdo  not  only  his 
but  all  the  rest  of  the  same  nature  put  together,  and 
will  lay  the  groundwork  of  a  standard  edition  of  the 
Old  Testament  for  the  future."  He  asks  that  His 
Majesty  will  "  make  Kennicott  partaker  of  his  Royal 
Bounty,  as  Queen  Anne  did  Dr.  Mill  for  his  work  on 
the  New  Testament."  ^ 

The  archbishop  a  few  days  later,  through  Newcastle, 
asks  the  patronage  of  Cambridge  University  for  Ken- 
nicott's work .2  If  the  Church  or  any  other  good  cause 
wanted  something  written  on  its  behalf  and  his  own 
pen  was  not,  as  it  often  was,  available.  Seeker  could 
put  his  finger  on  the  best  man  for  the  job  and  made 
him  do  it. 

Seeker  was  a  High  Churchman — in  the  eighteenth- 
century  sense,  if  not  exactly  in  the  sense  which  the 
closing  decades  of  the  nineteenth  century  have  at- 
tached to  the  title.    To  him  the  Church  was  no  mere 

*  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32902,  f.  104.       ^  Ubi  supra,  32902,  f.  147. 


298 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


congeries  of  believing  men  and  women  but  a  divinely- 
appointed  organisation,  of  which  Episcopacy  was  the 
essential  element,  and  whose  ministrations  and  sacra- 
ments were  God's  normal  way  of  salvation.  The  sects 
were  not  fellow-workers  moving  on  lines  converging  on 
the  same  goal,  but  wanderers.  In  his  first  charge  as 
archbishop  he  said  :  "  The  main  support  of  piety  and 
morals  consisted  in  the  parochial  labours  of  the  clergy  : 
and  if  this  country  could  be  preserved  from  utter  profli- 
gateness  and  ruin  it  must  be  by  these  means."  These 
were  his  tenets,  though  we  shall  see  that  in  practice  he 
was  on  most  kindly  terms  with  individual  Dissenters. 
It  was  his  views  of  the  validity  and  sanctity  of  Episcopal 
ordination  that  guided  his  conduct  with  reference  to 
appointing  bishops  for  America,  and  that  made  him  the 
champion  of  the  Scottish  Episcopal  clergy,  when  it  was 
sought  in  1748  to  invalidate  their  clerical  status 
unless  they  could  produce  Letters  of  Orders  from 
an  English  or  an  Irish  bishop.  As  archbishop, 
he  was  careful  of  the  clergy,  to  encourage  the 
deserving  and  to  keep  out  the  undesirable.  In  his 
first  charge  as  archbishop  he  dwells  on  the  importance 
of  strictness  in  giving  testimonials  to  candidates  for 
Orders.  "  We  must,"  he  said,  "  depend  on  regular 
testimonials — every  part  of  which  ought  to  be  con- 
sidered before  it  is  given,  and  no  consideration  paid  to 
neighbourhood,  acquaintance,  friendship,  compassion, 
importunity  ,when  theystand  in  competition  with  truth." 
He  is  said  to  have  insisted  on  curates  being  licensed  in 
the  diocese,  and  to  have  had  a  black  book  and  a  white 
book  :  once  in  the  black  book  no  influence  however 
powerful  could  get  you  preferment  from  him.  Young 
clergy  of  good  character  he  encouraged.  A  relative 
left  him  a  librarj'^  of  Divinity  ;  he  had  it  divided  by 
the  archdeacon  and  one  or  two  more  into  three 
parts,  and  these  were  given  to  three  "  studious  and 
regular  "  young  clergymen  for  their  encouragement  in 
study. 


1768]  NO  LATITUDINARIAN 


299 


He  was  a  strong  opponent  of  the  Latitudinarians. 
The  Christian  faith  embodied  in  the  Creeds,  as  Seeker 
believed,  was  to  be  accepted — not  pared  down,  even 
though  such  paring  removed  difficulties  from  some 
minds.  For  instance,  any  proposal  to  relax  the  doctrine 
of  the  eternity  of  punishment  met  with  but  cold  support 
from  Seeker.  In  one  of  his  letters  written  in  1744-5, 
while  Bishop  of  Oxford,  to  thank  the  great  Dr.  Isaac 
Watts  for  a  copy  of  his  Discourses  on  the  World  to  Come, 
after  commending  Watts'  great  services  to  religion 
and  saying  he  had  made  a  valuable  addition  to  them 
in  the  book  he  had  then  been  pleased  to  send  him,  he 
goes  on  :  "  particularly  by  what  you  have  written  in  so 
strong  and  awful,  yet  so  compassionate  and  good- 
natured  a  manner  in  defence  of  the  Scripture  doctrine 
concerning  the  duration  of  future  punishments."  ^ 

He  distrusted  the  forsaking  of  dogma.  In  one  of 
his  letters  to  his  "  good  "  friend  Johnson,  at  New  York, 
from  Lambeth,  he  says  : 

"  The  distinguishing  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  which 
we  in  this  country  have  neglected  too  much  and  dwelt 
disproportionately  on  morality  and  natural  religion, 
whence  the  Methodists  have  taken  advantage  to  decry 
in  us  and  gain  followers." 

He  had  no  sympathy  with  Bishop  Hoadly,  and 
spoke  of  some  Broad  Church  writers  as  being  Christians 
if  at  all  only  secundum  iisimi  Winton  :  Hoadly  being 
Bishop  of  Winchester  at  the  time. 

Unlike  his  predecessor  Hutton,  he  was  no  friend 
to  the  leading  Broad  Churchman  of  the  period.  Arch- 
deacon Blackburne.  Bishop  Butler's  charge  in  1751 
lamenting  the  decay  of  external  religion  had  been  met 
by  the  publication  of  A  Serious  Enquiry  into  the  Use 
and  Importance  of  External  Religion,  in  which  many 
Church  usages  were  called  superstitious.  It  came  out 
anonymously,  but  Seeker's  vigilance  discovered  Black- 

•  Gibbon's  Memoirs  of  Dr.  Watts,  p.  355. 


300 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


burne  as  the  author.  In  1766  Blackburne  pubHshed, 
also  anonymously,  his  great  work,  The  Confessional. 
It  sought  to  show  that  subscription,  i.e.,  the  requiring 
by  the  Church  of  England  of  assent  by  its  members  cleri- 
cal or  lay  to  a  body  of  propositions  on  religion  expressed 
in  human  language,  could  not  be  justified. 
The  author  expresses  himself  as  follows  : 

"  The  sum  of  the  whole  matter  is  this  :  place  3'our 
Church-authority  in  what  hands  you  will  and  limit  it 
with  whatever  restrictions  you  think  proper,  you  cannot 
assert  to  it  a  right  of  deciding  in  controversies  of  faith 
and  doctrine,  or  in  other  words  a  right  to  require  assent 
to  a  certain  sense  of  Scripture,  exclusive  of  other  senses, 
without  an  unwarrantable  interference  with  those 
rights  of  private  judgment  which  are  manifestly  secured 
to  every  individual  by  the  scriptural  terms  of  Christian 
liberty  and  thereby  contradicting  the  original  principles 
of  the  Protestant  Reformation."^ 

Canon  Perry  says  that  The  Confessional  was  "  a 
thorough  exposition  and  elaborate  defence  of  the  Lati- 
tudinarian  movement."  It  attacked,  curiously  enough, 
the  Broad  Church  position  that  subscription  was  a 
general  assent  only  to  Church  doctrine  as  a  whole,  and 
went  on  to  object  to  authoritative  confessions  of  faith 
and  Subscription  of  any  kind.  There  were  honourable 
names,  such  as  Dr.  Edmund  Law,  Bishop  of  Carlisle, 
and  Paley,  among  Blackburne's  allies  and  supporters. 
But  to  Seeker's  orthodoxy  The  Confessional  was 
utterly  repugnant.  He  procured  answers  to  be  written 
to  the  book,  one  by  Dr.  Gloucester  Ridley  being  pro- 
minent. He  is  even  said  to  have  written  one  of  the 
' '  Three  Letters  to  the  Author  of  The  Confessional ' ' 
himself. 

For  work  Seeker  had  an  insatiable  appetite.    "  He 
rose  at  six,"  says   Bishop  Porteous,  "  all  the  year 
round,  and  had  often  spent  a  busy  day  before  others 
began  to  enjoy  it."    Bishop  Newton,  who  succeeded 
*  The  Confessional,  3rd  ed.,  1770,  p.  50. 


1768] 


REGISTER  OF  HIS  DIOCESE 


301 


him  both  at  Bristol  and  St.  Paul's,  says  :  "  He  was  not 
only  a  most  learned  divine,  but  was  likewise  a  most 
indefatigable  and  exact  man  in  all  kinds  of  business." 
Speaking  of  Bristol,  Newton  says  that  in  his  day  all 
knowledge  of  the  diocese  was  derived  from  his  books 
and  accounts. 

There  is  in  the  library  at  Lambeth  a  Register  of 
Visitation  Returns  from  the  parishes  in  the  arch- 
diocese of  Canterbury  which  gives  strong  proof  of  what 
a  hard  worker  he  was  and  how  scrupulously  careful  a 
diocesan.  The  parishes  are  arranged  under  deaneries  ; 
particulars  are  given  of  the  churches,  the  accommoda- 
tion they  supply,  the  numbers  of  inhabitants,  the 
services  on  Sundays  and  other  days  ;  the  frequency 
of  communions  and  numbers  of  communicants,  and 
many  other  details.  Scarcely  anything  could  be  im- 
agined more  useful  to  a  succeeding  diocesan  or  vicar  : 
and  this  all,  or  nearly  all,  in  Seeker's  own  excellent 
handwriting. 

He  is  said  to  have  been  fond  of  riding  ;  and  to 
have  been  very  moderate  in  eating  and  drinking.  Of 
personal  idiosyncrasies  one  was  the  habit  of  calling 
every  one  he  addressed  "  Good."  A  lord  about  the 
Court  of  very  evil  life  being  so  addressed  by  the  arch- 
bishop, answered  :  "I  am  a  very  wicked  fellow  ;  why 
do  you  call  me  good  ?  "  It  is  curious  that  in  the 
selection  of  letters  from  Seeker,  published  by  Nichols  in 
his  Illustrations  of  Literature,'''  in  a  considerable  number 
the  person  addressed  is  called  "Good  Dr.  Birch"  or 
"  Good  Madam." 

He  was  undoubtedly  generous  with  his  money.  He 
was  hospitable,  as  a  bishop  should  be,  but  is  said  to 
have  thought  it  right  "  to  discountenance  as  far  as  he 
could  all  luxurious  elegancies."  He  would  never  give 
into  "  several  fashionable  accommodations,"  nor  admit 
extraordinary  delicacies  to  his  table,  nor  even  accept 
them  when  offered  to  him. 

*  Newton's  Life  and  Anecdotes,  p.  117.  *  Vol.  iii.  488,  492. 


302 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


He  bestowed  many  benefactions  in  the  county  of 
Kent  and  elsewhere ;  giving  large  sums  towards  the 
repair  of  decayed  vicarage  houses  and  for  relief  of  the 
distressed.  When  asked  to  support  a  useful  public 
subscription  he  gave,  say  his  chaplains,  "  much  more 
than  they  expected  ;  and  they  were  frequently  with- 
held from  repeating  their  solicitations  through  fear  not 
of  being  denied  but  of  trespassing  too  far  on  a  liberality 
that  knew  no  bounds."  ^  His  private  charity  was  very 
great.  He  gave  eight  pounds  to  the  church  or  chapel 
at  Sheerness  towards  purchasing  proper  communion 
plate ;  "  which  had  before,"  says  the  Chronicler,  "  been 
usually  borrowed  from  a  public-house  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood." 

A  story  is  told  of  him  that  a  German  divine  of  the 
Calvinistical  profession  who  had  applied  for  relief  to 
build  a  church  abroad  to  the  Kirk  of  Scotland  and  to 
Dissenters  in  England  about  1762  with  little  success, 
applied  at  last  to  the  archbishop.  "  He  received  him 
with  so  much  civility  and  humanity,  accosting  him  in 
a  familiar  manner  in  French,  of  which  language  he  was 
a  perfect  master,  that  it  raised  the  foreigner's  admira- 
tion." The  archbishop  assisted  him,  it  is  said,  more 
effectually  than  the  kirk  had  done. 

Seeker  was  a  consistent  supporter  of  the  Revolution, 
and,  in  spite  of  his  strong  Churchmanship,  had  no  trace 
of  Jacobitism  in  his  composition.  His  sermon  on  the 
victory  over  the  Pretender  at  Culloden  is  full  of  fire. 
It  is  one  of  Hollis'  charges  against  him  that  he  left 
popery  unnoticed — widespread,  intolerant,  overturning 
popery.  But  this  is  without  foundation  ;  his  pub- 
lished sermons  contain  a  course  of  five  against  popery 
— as  vigorous  as  any  of  his  discourses.  Rome  was  to 
him  dangerous  civilly  and  religiously,  and  he  opposed 
it  by  speech  and  action.  He  supported  Lord  Radnor's 
motion  for  an  inquiry  into  the  Roman  Catholic  numbers 
in  the  kingdom.  He  is  glad  to  write  to  Newcastle  that 
*  Porteous'  Life  of  Seeker,  p.  Ix. 


1768]     FRIENDSHIP  FOR  DISSENTERS  303 


only  two  hundred  and  seventy-one  were  returned  in  the 
two  hundred  and  forty-nine  parishes  of  his  own  diocese, 
and  only  sixty-eight  thousand  for  all  the  dioceses.^ 

But  in  spite  of  his  love  for  rigid  orthodoxy,  Seeker 
was  friendly  with  many  individual  Dissenters.  He 
distrusted,  like  so  many  good  men  of  his  time,  the 
enthusiasm  of  the  Methodists,  fearing  lest  it  should  be 
evanescent  and  thin  ;  and  in  his  second  archiepiscopal 
charge  he  advised  his  clergy  as  to  their  attitude  towards 
them. 

A  letter  of  advice  to- a  clergyman  on  his  son's  becom- 
ing a  Calvinist  gives  a  picture  of  his  ideas  on  such 
matters  : 

"  Lambeth,  2)i^d  November  1767. 
"  Sir, — I  am  very  sorry  that  your  son  hath  given 
you  cause  of  uneasiness  ;  but  as  a  zeal  of  God,  though 
in  part  not  according  to  knowledge,  influences  him  his 
present  state  is  far  better  than  that  of  a  profane  or 
vicious  person,  and  there  is  ground  to  hope  that  through 
the  divine  blessing  on  your  mild  instructions  and  affec- 
tionate expostulations  he  may  be  gradually  brought  into 
a  temper  every  way  Christian.  Perhaps  he  and  you 
differ  even  now  less  than  you  imagine  ;  for  I  have 
observed  that  the  Methodists  and  their  opposers  are 
apt  to  think  too  ill  of  each  other's  notions.  Our  clergy 
have  dwelt  too  much  upon  mere  morality,  and  too  little 
on  the  peculiar  doctrines  of  the  Gospel ;  and  hence  they 
have  been  charged  with  being  more  deficient  in  this 
last  respect  than  they  are,  and  even  with  disbelieving, 
or  however  slighting,  the  principal  points  of  revelation. 
They  in  turn  have  reproached  their  accusers  with  en- 
thusiastic imaginations,  irrational  tenets,  and  disregard 
to  the  common  social  duties  of  which  many  of  them 
perhaps  are  little  if  at  all  guilty.  .  .  . — Yr  loving  brother, 

"  Tho.  Cant." 

With  men  like  Watts,  Doddridge,  his  old  school- 
mate Chandler,  and  I.ardner,  the  correspondence  still 
extant  shows  him  to  have  maintained  over  many  years 
an  intimate  friendship.    He  seems  to  have  received 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32986,  f.  323. 


304 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


from  time  to  time  from  the  author  copies  of  the  books 
that  emanated  from  the  fruitful  pen  of  Isaac  Watts. 
The  following  letter  was  written  to  thank  for  a  copy  of 
Watts'  Improvement  of  the  Mind  ;  or,  A  Supplement  to  the 
Art  of  Logics  : 

"  CUDDESDON,  NEAR  OxFORD, 

June  19,  1 741 . 

"  Sir, — I  am  extremely  obliged  to  you  for  the  agree- 
able present  of  your  book,  which  is  peculiarly  adapted  for 
the  direction  and  improvement  of  students  in  the  Uni- 
versity, where  your  Logic  is  by  no  means  the  only  piece 
of  yours  that  is  read  with  high  esteem.  You  have  been 
a  diligent  promoter  of  useful  and  especially  religious 
knowledge  of  Christian  faith  and  Christian  morals.  On 
these  accounts  I  have  always  respected  3'ou  from  the 
time  that  I  had  so  many  years  ago  the  advantages  of 
your  conversation,  and  always  rejoiced  in  the  just 
honour  that  has  been  universall}'  paid  you  ;  and  as  this 
opportunity^  of  expressing  my  regard  gives  me  much 
pleasure,  so  if  the  favour  of  letting  me  see  you  next 
winter  will  not  be  inconvenient  to  you  it  will  be  a  great 
satisfaction  to.  Sir,  Your  affectionate  humble  Servant, 

"  Tho.  Oxford."  1 

Two  years  later  Seeker  writes  again  to  Isaac  Watts 
to  thank  him  for  his  Essay  towards  the  Encouragement 
of  Sunday  Schools  : 

"  CvnT>-EST>OT<i ,  September  14,  1743. 

"  Sir, — I  heartily  thank  you  for  your  obliging  letter, 
and  had  I  known  that  3'ou  had  printed  a  sermon  on  the 
subject,  I  should  not  have  failed  to  enrich  my  own  from 
it.  I  hope  the  things  I  have  said  in  favour  of  our  Charity 
Schools  are  true.  I  hope  the  Christians  of  this  nation 
in  general  are  grown  much  milder  towards  each  other, 
and  I  am  sure  we  have  great  need  to  gain  in  this  virtue 
what  we  lose  in  others  and  become  a  more  united  body 
as  we  become  a  smaller,  which  I  apprehend  we  do.  But 
fear  not,  little  flock.  May  God  direct  and  bless  us  all  in 
our  poor  endeavours  to  serve  Him  !  May  He  give  3'ou 
every  needful  support  under  your  long  sickness,  and 
restore  you  speedily  to  your  former  usefulness  if  it  be 

1  Gibbons'  Memoirs  of  Watts,  353. 


1768] 


PHILIP  DODDRIDGE 


30s 


His  holy  will.  I  am  with  great  esteem,  Sir,  Your  affec- 
tionate and  faithful,  humble  Servant, 

"  Tho.  Oxford." 

Two  letters  written  to  Philip  Doddridge  in  1 743  and 
1745  give  us  a  pretty  good  idea  of  Seeker's  feelings  and 
opinions  on  the  question  of  closer  reunion  with  Non- 
conformity. 

In  the  former  of  these,  dated  from  Cuddesden,  29th 
September  1743,  he  says  : 

"  Indeed,  it  must  and  ought  to  be  owned  in  general 
that  the  Dissenters  have  done  excellently  of  late  years  in 
the  service  of  Christianity  ;  and  I  hope  our  common 
warfare  will  make  us  chiefly  attentive  to  our  common 
interest  and  will  unite  us  in  a  closer  alliance."  ^ 

To  the  same  correspondent  he  writes,  21st  February 
1 744-5  : 

"  Your  favourable  opinion  of  the  Church  of  England 
gives  me  no  surprise  but  much  pleasure.  And  as  I  agree 
with  you  heartily  in  wishing  that  such  things  as  we 
think  indifferent,  and  you  cannot  be  brought  to  think 
lawful,  were  altered  or  left  free,  in  such  a  manner  as  that 
we  might  all  unite  ;  so  I  have  no  reason  to  believe  that 
any  one  of  the  Bishops  wishes  otherwise  ;  and  I  know 
some  that  wish  it  strongly  whom,  I  fear ,  many  of  the  Dis- 
senters take  to  be  of  a  different  spirit ;  nor,  perhaps,  were 
the  body  of  the  Clergy  ever  so  well  disposed  to  it  as  now. 
But  still  I  see  not  the  least  prospect  of  it  ;  for  they  who 
should  be  most  concerned  for  it  are  most  of  them  too 
little  so.  And  of  others  few  that  have  influence  think  it 
can  be  worth  while  either  to  take  any  pains  or  spend  any 
time  about  matters  of  this  nature  ;  and  too  many  judge 
the  continuance  of  a  separation  useful  to  their  particular 
schemes.  Among  these  last  the  enemies  of  Religion  are 
apt  to  consider  the  Dissenters  as  their  allies  against  the 
Established  Church.  But  as  I  hope  they  will  never 
have  cause  to  join  in  any  designs  against  it,  so  I  am 
fully  persuaded  they  will  never  think  a  combination 
with  such  persons  justifiable  either  in  point  of  prudence 
or  of  conscience."  ^ 

*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  484. 

*  Doddridge's  Correspondence,  iv.  270,  381. 


3o6 


THOMAS  SECKER 


[1758- 


In  a  letter  to  Lardner,  dated  5th  December  1750,  he 
thus  discusses  the  terms  of  Communion  with  Noncon- 
formists : 

"  What  the  terms  of  Communion  thus  necessary  and 
requisite  are,  all  Churches  and,  so  far  as  they  are  con- 
cerned, all  persons  must  judge  for  themselves  ...  he 
who  thinks  more  things  necessary  should  neither  treat 
those  ill  who  believe  fewer  nor  rank  them  with  total 
unbelievers.  .  .  .  On  the  other  hand,  he  who  believes 
fewer  things  to  be  necessary  should  neither  censure 
those  who  believe  more  to  be  so  as  tyrannical  or  un- 
charitable merely  because  they  dare  not  acknowledge 
him  to  be  what  according  to  the  best  judgment  they 
can  form  he  is  not."^ 

"  To  several  foreign  Protestants,"  says  Bishop 
Porteous,  "  he  allowed  pensions,  to  others  he  gave 
occasional  relief,  and  to  some  of  their  universities  was 
an  annual  benefactor." 

We  have  mentioned  that  Dr.  Mayhew  of  Boston 
wrote  a  pamphlet  expressing  strongly  the  repugnance 
of  the  American  Dissenters  to  the  appointment  of 
bishops  for  the  American  Colonies.  Perhaps  the 
following  passage  from  almost  the  end  of  his  answer 
to  Mayhew  deserves  to  be  quoted  as  showing  Seeker's 
real  feeling  and  line  of  thought  towards  Nonconformists  : 

"  Our  inclination  is  to  live  in  friendship  with  all 
the  Protestant  Churches.  We  assist  and  protect  those 
on  the  Continent  of  Europe  as  well  as  we  are  able.  We 
show  our  regard  to  that  of  Scotland  as  often  as  we 
have  an  opportunity  and  believe  the  members  of  it  are 
sensible  that  we  do.  To  those  who  differ  from  us  in 
this  part  of  the  kingdom  we  neither  attempt  nor  wish 
any  mjury  ;  and  we  shall  gladly  give  proofs  to  every 
denomination  of  Christians  in  our  Colonies  that  we  are 
friends  to  a  toleration  even  of  the  most  intolerant  as 
far  as  it  is  safe  ;  and  willing  that  all  mankind  should 
possess  all  the  advantages  religious  and  civil  which 
they  can  demand  either  in  law  or  reason." 

*  Larduer's  Life,  p.  cl. 


1768] 


HIS  CHARGES 


307 


Seeker's  episcopal  and  archiepiscopal  charges  deserve 
a  word  from  his  biographer.  There  are  eight  of  them — 
five  dehvered  while  Bishop  of  Oxford,  and  three  as 
Primate.  In  the  first,  delivered  in  1738,  he  takes  a 
gloomy  view  of  the  position  of  religion  in  general. 
"  An  open  and  profess 'd  disregard  of  religion  is  become 
the  distinguishing  character  of  the  present  age."  He 
urges  study  on  the  clergy.  What  may  be  a  very  good 
beginning  is  by  no  means  a  sufficient  stock  to  go  on 
with.  This  charge  Seeker  liked  and  thought  well  of. 
It  was  reprinted  and  distributed  from  Canterbury  in 
1758.  From  his  charge  of  1741  it  seems  that  choirs 
were  a  trouble  to  the  clergy  even  in  those  days.  "  If," 
says  the  bishop,  "  in  order  to  instruct  your  people  in 
the  way  of  singing,  meetings  to  practise  out  of  Church 
time  be  requisite,  you  will  keep  a  strict  watch  over 
them  that  they  be  managed  with  all  possible  decency 
and  never  continued  till  candle-light  if  they  be  of 
both  sexes.  You  will  likewise  discountenance  at  least 
all  frequent  meetings  between  the  singers  of  different 
parishes  and  making  appointments  to  sing  alternately 
at  one  another's  churches  ;  for  this  wandering  from 
their  own,  which  by  law  they  ought  to  keep  to,  usually 
leads  them  into  excesses  and  follies." 

The  next  three  charges  deal  with  simony,  resignation 
bonds,  tithes,  and  repairs  of  churches  and  parsonages. 
He  alludes  to  the  duty  of  the  clergy  at  county  elections, 
"  seasons  of  epidemical  unreasonableness  and  licentious- 
ness," 

We  get  a  picture  in  his  1762  charge,  delivered  after 
he  was  archbishop,  of  the  evils  attendant  on  the  private 
baptisms  so  common  among  the  upper  classes  at  that 
time.  He  says  :  "  Baptism  when  administered  in 
private  houses  without  necessity  is  too  often  treated 
even  during  the  administration  rather  as  an  idle  cere- 
mony than  Christian  sacrament  ;  or,  however  that  be, 
is  close  followed  by  very  unsuitable  if  not  otherwise 
also  indecent  levity  and  jollity.    They  should  support 


3o8 


THOMAS  SECKER  [1758- 


the  solemnity  of  the  ordinance  and  either  prevent 
improprieties  in  the  sequel  or,  if  it  be  doubtful,  whether 
he  can  excuse  himself  with  a  civil  intimation  of  the 
unfitness  of  them  from  being  present." 

On  clerical  dress  he  says,  "  a  habit,  visibly  a  clergy- 
man's, must  have  no  effeminacy  or  love  of  finery  in  it." 
The  archbishop  condemned  in  his  clergy,  "  softness 
and  delicacy  of  manner,  skill  in  the  science  of  eating 
and  the  perfection  of  liquors."  We  are  reminded  of  Dr. 
Young  in  Mansfield  Park. 

The  advice  on  sermons  of  such  a  master  of  preaching 
is  in  two  of  his  later  charges  and  is  worth  quoting  : 

"  Make  your  sermons  extremely  clear  ;  employ  the 
lowest  expressions,  provided  they  are  not  ridiculous, 
rather  than  not  be  understood  ;  let  your  sentences 
and  the  parts  of  them  be  short  where  you  can  ;  never 
multiply  beyond  necessity,  for  they  will  only  tire  ; 
abstain  from  weak  ones  for  they  wAW  only  discredit 
the  strong  ;  employ  no  arguments  to  prove  things 
which  need  not  be  proved,  for  3-ou  will  onl}'  make  them 
doubtful." 

Extempore  preaching  he  touches  on  wisely  : 

"  What  we  sa}'  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make  it  seem 
the  present  desire  of  our  own  hearts  will  much  better 
make  its  way  into  the  hearts  of  others,  than  if  our  eyes 
are  fixed  all  the  while  on  a  paper  from  which  we  visibly 
recite  the  whole.  .  .  .  But  there  must  be  a  long  and 
diligent  preparation  to  do  this  well.  Some  will  scarce 
ever  attain  sufficient  presence  of  mind  or  readiness  of 
expression,  and  others  will  acquit  themselves  hand- 
somely in  a  good  flow  of  spirits,  but  meanly  when  these 
fail  them.  If  some  get  the  facult}-  of  being  always  able 
to  say  something  plausible,  it  will  tempt  them  to  neglect 
the  improvement  of  their  understandings  and  discourses, 
and  to  be  content  with  digressing  whensoever  they 
are  at  a  loss  from  their  text  and  their  subject  to 
any  point  on  which  they  can  be  copious  ;  to  utter 
offhand  such  crudities  as  they  could  not  bear  to  write 
down." 


1768]    LEARNING  SERMONS  BY  HEART  309 


He  is  not  opposed  to  preaching  a  sermon  several 
times  with  revision  :  "  by  looking  over  it  a  few  times 
when  you  are  about  to  use  it  you  may  deUver  it  almost 
without  being  observed  to  read  it."  He  favours 
preaching  from  notes  :  "  perhaps,  duly  managed,  the 
best  plan  of  all."  He  alludes  to  the  practice  common 
among  foreigners  of  learning  their  sermons  by  heart. 
The  plan  is  "  not  only,"  he  says,  "  unreasonably 
laborious,  but  subjects  persons  to  the  hazard  of  stopping 
disagreeably  and  even  breaking  off  abruptly  for  want 
of  memory  ;  or  if  they  escape  that  danger,  there  still 
remains  another,  of  saying  their  lesson  with  ungraceful 
marks  of  fear  and  caution."  He  would  like  to  add 
some  "  occasional  instructions,"  but  adds  sadly,  "  my 
strength  will  not  suffice." 

He  printed  some  instructions  given  to  candidates 
for  Orders  after  their  subscribing  the  Articles.  They 
had  a  phenomenal  popularity.  No  less  than  fifty 
editions  were  published  in  half  a  century. 

His  other  literary  remains  are  considerable.  Two 
volumes  of  occasional  sermons  were  published  in  his 
lifetime  ;  his  lectures  on  the  Church  Catechism,  his 
charges  and  four  volumes  of  sermons  after  his  death  ; 
he  also  left  to  the  Lambeth  Library  a  number  of  learned 
manuscript  pieces,  including  an  interleaved  English 
Bible  with  many  suggestions  for  improvement  of  the 
English  Version  ;  a  Hebrew  Bible  with  comparisons 
of  the  ancient  versions  and  emendations  ;  two  folio 
volumes  of  notes  upon  Daniel,  and  many  other  pieces 
such  as  we  should  expect  from  a  prelate  who  was  at 
once  so  learned  and  so  industrious. 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS 
1 768-1 783 

Before  Seeker  died  England  had  come  under  the  rule 
of  George  iii.,  who  succeeded  his  grandfather  on  the 
25th  October  1760.  For  the  purposes  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical historian  this  change  of  monarch  is  of  great  im- 
portance. The  position  which  George  iii.  took  up  as 
regards  the  Church,  and  as  regards  the  appointment 
of  archbishops  and  bishops,  was  quite  different  from 
that  of  his  predecessors.  Personally,  he  was  widely- 
different  from  them.  George  i.  had  a  certain  sly 
sharpness  :  he  was  immoral  :  he  was  a  German. 
George  11.  had  some  courage  as  a  soldier,  though  not 
so  much  as  he  credited  himself  with,  and  he  obeyed  his 
able  wife  ;  otherwise  he  was  immoral  ;  and  his  heart 
was  throughout  his  life,  like  his  father's,  in  Hanover, 
and  he  was  stupid.  George  iii.  was  an  Englishman  : 
he  was  obstinate,  and  his  intellectual  outlook  was 
narrow  ;  he  lost  England  the  American  Colonies,  though 
we  of  the  twentieth  century  may  doubt  if  she  could 
ever  have  kept  them  :  he  upheld  slavery  ;  but  his 
domestic  and  personal  morality  was  high.  He  set  a 
good  example  in  his  home,  and  to  his  subjects.  His  ideas 
of  his  duty  towards  God  and  his  neighbour  were  strong 
and  right,  and  he  regarded  the  Established  Church  of 
England  as  supplying  the  best,  if  not  the  only  effective, 
aids  to  the  discharge  of  these  duties,  and  the  British 
Constitution  of  King,  Lords,  and  Commons  as  the  best 
mode  of  government  the  world  had  known.  To  his 
mind  no  duty  was  of  higher  importance  than  the 

selection  of  the  Church's  chief  officers. 

310 


1 768- 1 783]     CHURCH  PATRONAGE 


3" 


And  yet  it  is  a  melancholy  truth  that  in  the  first  and 
second  Primates  of  George  iii.  we  reach  the  lowest  point 
in  the  period  of  which  we  are  chroniclers.  It  is  a  descent 
from  Seeker — a  vast  descent  from  Wake — to  Corn- 
wallis  and  Moore.  At  the  same  time  it  would  not  be 
fair  to  blame  George  iii.  entirely  for  the  inferiority  of 
these  two  prelates.  When  Cornwallis  was  appointed, 
the  King  was  still  very  young  and  largely  in  the  hands 
of  Ministers  perhaps  uncongenial  to  him.  It  was  the 
system  or  rather  the  prevalent  views  of  Church  prefer- 
ment or  patronage  that  were  to  blame.  As  has  been 
well  said,  "Britain  in  the  eighteenth  century  was  ruled 
by  a  Venetian  oligarchy  ...  a  few  family  clans  com- 
posed the  governing  classes  of  the  period — the  leaders 
of  the  great  families  were  found  constantly  in  the  higher 
and  their  relatives  in  the  lower  posts  of  each  Govern- 
ment."^ And  to  this  regime  the  Church,  alas  I  was  no 
exception.  If  a  scion  of  a  great  family  had  no  taste  for 
war  or  diplomacy,  the  Church  should  provide  for  him. 
It  was  almost  avowedly  a  department  of  the  State. 
Any  idea  of  an  organisation  of  spiritual  forces  and  of 
its  officers,  as  those  who  should  develop,  promote,  and 
guide  those  forces,  was  wholly  wanting  alike  in  the 
givers  and  in  the  recipients  of  Church  patronage.  Learn- 
ing in  a  bishop  had  been  known  to  give  trouble  :  zeal 
was  certainly  dangerous.  This  idea  of  the  highest 
offices  in  the  Church  had  a  degrading  effect  on  the 
bishops  and  archbishops  themselves  ;  Cornwallis,  as  we 
shall  see,  not  only  asked  for  a  particular  bishopric,  but 
was  angry  that  he  did  not  receive  exactly  the  bit  of  patron- 
age he  wanted.  Moore  developed  a  shameful  nepotism, 
hurrying  on  his  possession  of  the  archiepiscopal  tempor- 
alities that  he  might  give  a  good  archbishop's  living, 
that  was  dropping,  to  his  sister's  husband. 

We  shall  deal  hereafter  in  detail  with  what  can  be 
ascertained  regarding  Cornwallis'  appointment  to  the 
archbishopric  of  Canterbury.     Canon   Perry,  in  his 

*  Warner  and  Martin's  Groundwork  of  British  History,  479. 


312 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS 


[1768- 


History  of  the  English  Church,  says  :  "  Archbishop 
CornwaUis  appears  to  have  had  no  Churchmanhke 
scruples,  and  was  simply  of  the  character  of  a  great 
nobleman  about  the  Court."  Making  due  allowance  for 
the  religious  laxity  of  the  second  half  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  it  is  hard  to  challenge  seriously  this  verdict. 

Frederick  Cornwallis  was  the  seventh  son  of  Charles, 
fourth  Lord  Cornwallis.  He  was  brother  to  the  first  Earl 
Cornwallis,  and  uncle  to  the  celebrated  first  Marquis 
and  to  James,  Bishop  of  Lichfield  and  Coventry.  He 
was  a  twin-brother  of  General  Edward  Cornwallis,  and 
Cole  relates  that  the  twin-brothers  were  so  alike  when 
at  Eton  that  it  was  difficult  to  know  them  asunder. 

The  family  of  Cornwallis,  or  as  it  was  anciently 
spelt  Cornwallys  or  Cornwaleys,  was  established  at 
Brome  Hall  near  Eye  in  Suffolk  in  the  fourteenth 
century.  The  founder  of  the  family  in  England  was 
Sheriff  of  London  in  1378.  He  settled  in  Suffolk,  and 
his  son  and  grandson  represented  the  county  in  Parlia- 
ment. A  successor,  Sir  Frederick  Cornwallis,  who  had 
followed  the  fortunes  of  Charles  i.  and  Charles  11.,  was 
in  1 66 1  created  Baron  Cornwallis  of  Eye. 

Charles,  the  fourth  lord,  the  father  of  the  arch- 
bishop, was  Lord  Lieutenant  of  the  county  of  Suffolk, 
and  postmaster-general  and  paymaster  of  the  Forces. 
He  had  many  sons,  of  whom  three  were  Charles  the 
fifth  lord,  Frederick  the  archbishop,  and  his  twin, 
Edward.  The  fifth  lord  married,  in  1722,  Elizabeth, 
daughter  of  Charles,  second  Viscount  Townshend, 
brother-in-law  and  for  many  years  colleague  of  the 
Prime  Minister,  Sir  Robert  Walpole.  We  shall  see 
that  between  the  families  of  Cornwallis  and  Townshend 
there  were  several  ties  of  marriage.  The  fifth  Lord 
was  in  1753  created  Earl  Cornwallis.  His  sixth  child, 
but  eldest  son  Charles,  was  a  man  of  very  sound  common 
sense,  with  a  strong  sense  of  justice,  and  rendered 
most  distinguished  service  to  his  country  all  over  the 
world.    He  commanded  the  English  forces  in  America 


1783] 


SCHOOL  AND  COLLEGE 


313 


in  the  War  of  Independence,  and,  more  from  bad  luck 
than  his  fault,  was  compelled  to  surrender  at  Yorktown, 
thus  finally  disposing  of  any  hope  of  crushing  the 
American  people  into  subjection.  As  Governor-General 
of  India  he  defeated  Tippoo,  the  son  of  Hyder  Ali, 
and — more  important — made  the  permanent  settlement 
of  land  in  Bengal.  Under  his  Vice-royalty  in  Ireland 
the  Act  of  Union  was  passed.  Hundreds  of  his  letters 
are  extant,  in  which  none  are  more  delightful  than 
those  from  the  Viceroy  of  India  to  his  son  at  Eton. 
He  became  first  Marquis  Cornwallis  on  15th  August  1792. 

Archbishop  Cornwallis  was  thus  of  noble  birth,  as 
well  as  connected  with  the  great,  being  brother  to  an 
earl  and  uncle  to  a  marquis,  to  say  nothing  of  uncle 
to  a  bishop.  He  is  said  to  have  been  the  first 
Primate  of  high  birth  since  Cardinal  Reginald  Pole.^ 
The  archbishop  was  born  22nd  February  171 3,  and 
educated  at  Eton.  While  at  Eton  he  had  among  his 
friends  Charles  Pratt,  afterwards  Lord  Chancellor 
Camden,  and  Dr.  Sneyd-Davies,  a  scholar  and  poet 
whom  when  bishop  he  appointed  his  chaplain,  and 
with  whom  he  corresponded  and  maintained  a  friend- 
ship throughout  his  life.  Cornwallis  was  afterwards 
Fellow  of  Christ's  College,  Cambridge Here  he  was 
pupil  to  Dr.  Edmund  Law,  a  divine  who  made  a  good 
deal  of  stir  in  the  eighteenth  century,  and  who  was 
successively  archdeacon  of  Stafford,  being  appointed 
by  his  former  pupil  when  Bishop  of  Lichfield,  and  in 
1769  Bishop  of  Carlisle.  The  archbishop  became  B.A., 
1736.  When  a  young  man  at  Cambridge,  Cornwallis 
had  a  paralytic  stroke,  or,  as  it  was  called  in  the 
medical  language  of  that  day,  a  stroke  of  the  palsy 
on  his  right  side,  from  which  he  never  recovered  the  full 
use  of  his  right  hand,  and  was  obliged  to  write  with 
his  left,  which  he  did  very  expeditiously,  and,  says 
Cole,  "  I  have  often  had  the  honour  to  play  at  cards 

'  Cave  Browne's  Lambeth,  i6o. 

•Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  i.  501. 


314 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS 


[1768- 


with  him  when  it  was  wonderful  to  see  how  dexterously 
he  would  shuffle  and  play  them." 

Cornwallis  took  his  D.D.  degree  in  1748.  He  was 
evidently  marked  out  for  preferment.  He  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  H.M.'s  chaplains  and  a  canon  of  Windsor. 
Archbishop  Herring  in  writing  to  the  Duke  of  New- 
castle on  the  8th  January  1 749  speaking  of  his  promotion, 
says  of  him  :  "  By  the  character  Dr.  Cornwallis  bears 
one  has  nothing  more  to  wish  but  that  his  health  may 
equal  the  goodness  of  his  heart  and  understanding."  ^ 

In  the  winter  of  1749-50,  Cornwallis  received  the 
Bishopric  of  Lichfield  and  Coventry  ;  the  Duke  of 
Newcastle  was  at  the  time  the  great  dispenser  of  sees 
and  judgeships,  and  was  a  connexion  of  the  Cornwallis 
family.  The  fifth  lord,  shortly  to  be  an  Earl,  was  a  man 
to  be  propitiated.  The  new  bishop  WTites  to  Newcastle 
on  the  6th  January  1 750  :  "  I  want  words  to  express  how 
much  I  am  obliged  to  your  Grace  for  the  fresh  instance 
of  your  regard  and  kindness  to  me."  He  will  endeavour 
to  please  our  friends  in  that  diocese  and  to  promote 
His  Majesty's  interest  in  those  parts.  ..."  I  am  sure," 
says  the  new  bishop,  "  my  brother  will  always  remember 
that  his  obligation  is  solely  to  your  Grace  for  this 
Bishopric."  ^ 

The  times  were  sleepy  ;  and  in  a  letter  to  his  old 
schoolmate,  Sneyd-Davies,  written  a  few  years  later 
and  dated  31st  June  1756,  the  bishop,  after  saying,  as 
so  many  travellers  about  that  time  did,  that  in  a 
journey  through  England  he  had  never  known  the 
roads  so  bad  in  his  life  before,  says  :  "  There  really 
is  no  stirring  news.  We  are  indeed  preparing  for  war, 
which  seems  now  to  be  inevitable, — but  when  or  how 
or  where  it  will  be  is  not  so  certain." ^ 

On  2nd  June  1757  he  writes  to  the  same  corre- 
spondent :  "  I  believe  there  never  was  so  extraordinary  a 


1  Newcastle  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit  Mus.,  32700,  L  29. 

*Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32720,  f.  17. 

'  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  in.  500. 


A  JOURNEY  TO  LONDON 


315 


winter  as  the  last  ;  no  division  in  either  House,  no 
Ministry,  no  business  done  ;  and  this  at  a  time  when 
the  best  counsels  seemed  most  necessary.  The  Parha- 
ment  adjourned  till  Monday  next  ;  by  which  time  it 
is  thought  there  will  be  a  new  Ministry  fixed — though  I 
do  not  find  that  anything  is  yet  certain  except  that 
the  Duke  of  Newcastle  will  be  at  the  head  of  the 
Treasury  again."  In  this  the  bishop's  prognostication 
was  fulfilled,  for  though  Pitt  was  in  power  as  Secretary 
of  State,  Newcastle  returned  to  the  Treasury.  It  takes 
the  bishop  three  days  to  get  down  from  London  to 
Eccleshall.  The  bishop  goes  up  to  the  meeting  of 
Parliament  in  November  1758,  reaching  London  "  in 
good  time  "  on  the  fourth  day  after  losing  one  of  his  five 
horses — "  poor  Squeaker  " — who  dropped  dead  in  his 
harness  at  Dunstable  Hill.  "  Having  a  seventh  horse," 
says  Cornwallis,  "it  retarded  us  but  little."  The 
episcopal  coach  when  loaded  was  presumably  heavy. 
Of  the  new  Session  he  says:  "  We  met  on  Thursday 
with  but  thin  houses.  The  speech  was  a  good  one,  I 
think.  ...  It  is  likely  to  be  a  quiet  Session  ;  as,  it  is 
said,  we  are  all  unanimous." 

George  11.  was  nearing  his  last  short  but  fatal  attack, 
but  the  writer  was  able  to  sa}^ :  "  The  King  has  had  a 
regular  fit  of  the  gout  in  his  foot,  and  is  now  quite  well ; 
a  strong  instance  of  a  hale  constitution  at  75  ;  and  in  all 
probability  it  will  prolong  his  life  many  years." 

On  the  8th  February  1759  Cornwallis  married 
Caroline,  daughter  of  William  Townshend,  third  son  of 
Charles,  second  Viscount  Townshend.  He  writes  on 
ist  March  1 759  to  his  friend  Sneyd-Davies  :  "  I  return  you 
many  thanks  for  your  kind  congratulations  upon  my 
marriage  ;  I  shall  be  much  mistaken,  indeed,  if  it 
should  not  greatly  advance  my  future  comfort  and 
happiness  in  life."^  The  new  wife  was  a  great  lady, 
and  his  marriage  brought  the  bishop,  if  he  were  not 
there  already,  into  the  highest  social  circles.    The  lady 

*  Nichok'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  502. 


3i6 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS 


ti768- 


survived  the  archbishop  for  twenty-eight  years,  till 
September  1811,  but  he  had  no  child  by  her.  It  is 
probable  that  in  the  eighteenth  century,  though  the 
Primates  included  sons  of  tradesmen  like  Potter  and 
Moore,  a  larger  proportion  of  prelates  were  connected 
with  the  nobility  than  at  the  present  time.  In  1783 
there  were  one  baronet,  three  honourables,  and  a  son  of  a 
duke  or  marquis  on  the  Episcopal  Bench.  Birth  and  good 
family  at  least  gave  a  promising  man  his  opportunity. 
The  families  of  Cornwallis  and  Townshend  were  closely 
connected  by  marriage — one  aunt  of  the  archbishop's 
wife  having  married  the  archbishop's  elder  brother, 
the  first  Earl  Cornwallis,  and  another  aunt  having 
married  the  archbishop's  twin-brother.  Charles  Town- 
shend, of  whom  it  was  said  he  is  the  orator,  the  rest  are 
speakers,  and  who  was  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  under 
Chatham  in  1766,  was  first  cousin  of  the  archbishop's 
wife. 

In  September  1759  we  get  an  interesting  picture 
of  life  in  the  district  of  Eccleshall  in  a  letter  from  the 
bishop  to  his  old  school  friend.  Apparently  a  supine 
movement  had  spread  from  Parliament  to  the  country  at 
large.  "  We  have  been  endeavouring,"  says  the  bishop, 
"  to  establish  a  County  Hospital,  but  I  fear  it  will  not  do. 
There  is  money  enough  subscribed,  but  then  there  is  a 
supineness  and  inactivity  towards  the  executive  part 
of  it  that  must  frustrate  it." 

It  is  a  disagreeable  feature  of  the  disposal  of  Church 
patronage  at  this  period — consequent  on  the  views 
prevalent  touching  such  matters  to  which  we  have 
alluded — that  posts  were  often  asked  for  long  before 
the  holders  of  them  were  dead.  Cornwallis  was  not 
satisfied  with  his  Bishopric  of  Lichfield  and  Coventry, 
and  on  the  26th  September  1759  he  writes  to  Newcastle : 

"  The  Bishop  of  Worcester  is  very  ill.  I  hope  your 
Grace  will  pardon  my  troubling  you  with  this,  barely 
to  mention  without  importuning  that  a  removal  to  that 


1783]    ELECTION  OF  A  HIGH  STEWARD  317 


see  would  be  most  agreeable  to  your  Grace's  most 
obliged  and  most  humble  servant, 

"Fred  Lich.  and  Cov."^ 

Newcastle  replied  a  week  later  that  he  had  to  give 
Worcester  to  the  Bishop  of  Gloucester.  Cornwallis  was 
angry  at  this,  as  we  shall  see,  and  spoke  of  the  "  loss 
he  had  sustained." 

In  May  1762  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  fell  out  with 
Bute,  and  for  the  first  time  resigned.  Horace  Walpole, 
in  a  letter  to  Geo.  Montagu,  remarks  sarcastically  that 
"  all  bishops  are  prophets,  they  foresee  that  he  will 
never  come  into  place  again,  for  there  was  but  one  that 
had  the  decency  to  take  leave  of  him  "  (at  his  parting 
levee)  "  after  crowding  his  rooms  for  forty  years 
together.    It  was  Cornwallis." 

There  are  but  few  traces  of  Cornwallis'  activities  at 
Lichfield  ;  but  we  find  him  helping  the  efforts  of 
Archbishop  Seeker  to  improve  the  collection  of  Diocesan 
Records  at  Lambeth  by  sending  particulars  of  en- 
dowments of  vicarages  in  the  Diocese  of  Lichfield  and 
Coventry. 

In  March  1764  the  great  Lord  Hardwicke  died,  and 
Cambridge  was  excited  over  the  election  of  a  High 
Steward  in  his  place.  Lord  Mahon  says  "that  no  sooner 
was  his  dangerous  illness  known  than  two  candidates 
declared  themselves :  the  first  was  Lord  Hardwicke 's  son, 
Lord  Royston,  the  second  Lord  Sandwich.  It  grew  to  be 
in  some  measure  a  trial  of  strength  between  the  Opposi- 
tion and  the  Government."  ^  At  the  head  of  the  Govern- 
ment was  Lord  Grenville,  who  had  succeeded  Bute  as 
Prime  Minister  in  1 763.  John  Wilkes  and  General  War- 
rants were  the  topics  of  the  day.  Lord  Sandwich  was  a 
Minister,  having  been  at  the  Admiralty  and  thenSecretary 
of  State.  The  Opposition  included  Pitt,  who  had  de- 
clined office.    Of  Sandwich,  Professor  Laughton  says 

*  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  3289G,  fi.  122,  218;  32940,  f.  239. 

*  History,  v.  60. 


318 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS 


[1768- 


though  admitting  that  he  was  esteemed  and  loved  by  his 
subordinates  at  the  Admiralty  :  "  No  public  man  of  the 
last  century  was  the  mark  of  such  bitter,  such  violent 
invective."  He  certainly  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
the  man  to  be  Lord  High  Steward  of  the  University 
of  Cambridge.  The  way  he  got  his  nickname  of  "Jimmy 
Twitcher  "  shows  this,  Wilkes  had  composed  a  parody 
on  Pope's  "  Essay  on  Man,"  which  he  called  an  "  Essay 
on  Woman,"  and  which  he  inscribed  to  Sandwich,  as 
Pope  had  inscribed  his  "  Essay  on  Man  "to  Bolingbroke. 
Sandwich  called  attention  to  this,  as  a  scandalous  libel, 
in  the  House  of  Lords,  and  the  House  asked  for  a  prose- 
cution. But  popular  feeling  was  against  Sandwich. 
His  private  life,  says  Lord  Mahon,  was  known  to  be  fully 
as  irregular  as  Wilkes's,  with  whom  he  had  been 
associated  in  the  Licentious  Brotherhood  of  Medmenham. 
In  the  Beggars'  Opera,  Macheath,  at  the  crowning  scene, 
says  "  that  Jimmy  Twitcher  "  (one  of  his  confederates) 
"  should  peach  does  surprise  me."  When  the  play  was 
performed  at  Co  vent  Garden,  the  audience,  with  a 
unanimous  shout  of  applause,  applied  the  passage  to 
Sandwich,  and  the  name  stuck  to  him.  Of  his 
opponent,  the  second  Lord  Hardwicke,  Cooper's 
Annals  of  Cambridge  says  he  was  "  Lord  Lieutenant  of 
Cambridgeshire,  a  Trustee  of  the  British  Museum,  and 
honourabty  distinguished  by  his  classical  and  historical 
learning."  Cornwallis,  who  was  interested  in  the  affairs 
of  his  University,  and  was  for  the  new  Lord  Hardwicke, 
seems  to  have  been  on  the  right  side,  and  wrote  to  his 
friend  Mr.  Evans,  who  was  arranging  something  like  a 
"  pair  "  with  one  Harwood.  The  bishop  was  cautious. 
Under  date  20th  March  1 764  : 

"  I  received  yours,"  he  writes  to  Evans, "  dated  Win- 
chester, the  14th  inst.,  and  approve  very  well  of  your 
compromise  provided  you  can  depend  fully  and  securely 
upon  your  man.  I  do  not  know  Mr.  Harwood,  but  am 
aware  that  tricks  have  often  been  played  upon  such 
occasions  ;  and  though  I  can  have  no  reason  to  suspect 


1783]  A  TIE  AND  A  LAWSUIT 


319 


him,  yet  think  it  necessary  to  use  particular  caution 
upon  the  present  occasion  from  the  arrangements  that 
have  already  been  made  use  of  by  our  antagonist.  If, 
therefore,  you  are  sure  Mr.  Harwood  is  for  Lord  Sand- 
wich, and  will  stay  away,  I  shall  be  very  glad  to  excuse 
you  so  long  and  fruitless  a  journey,  and  shall  think 
myself  equally  obliged  to  you  as  if  you  had  taken  it. 
The  election  is  put  off  till  the  30th." 

Horace  Walpole  having  said  in  a  previous  letter 
that  the  election  at  Cambridge  was  to  be  on  the  24th, 
writes  on  Tuesday,  27th  March  :  "  The  busier  world  are 
devoting  attention  to  the  election  at  Cambridge,  which 
comes  on  next  Friday  ;  and  I  think  now  Lord  Sandwich's 
friends  have  little  hopes.  Had  I  a  vote  it  would  not  be 
given  for  the  new  Lord  Hardwicke."^  The  election 
ended  strangely  The  votes  appeared  equal  ;  each 
proctor,  they  being  of  different  sides,  claimed  a  majority 
of  one.  In  fact  it  was  found  that  Hardwicke  had  a 
majority  in  the  non-Regents  of  two,  the  Regent  House 
being  equally  divided.  He  applied  for  a  mandamus  to 
the  K.B.,  and  said  "  one  Pitt,  who  voted  against  him 
among  the  Regents,  ought  to  have  voted  as  a  non- 
Regent,  having  been  an  M.A.  for  five  years  and  more." 
His  opponents  objected,  and  also  to  five  other  Regent 
votes  of  squires,  bedals,  and  others.  There  was  a  law- 
suit, which  gave  the  post  to  Lord  Hardwicke.^  So 
Cornwallis  was  on  the  winning  side.  Horace  Walpole 
says  that  "  the  indecent  arts  and  applications  of  the 
Twitcherites  "  roused  the  undergraduates  to  great 
enthusiasm  for  Lord  Hardwicke. 

At  the  end  of  1765  a  vacancy  at  Salisbury— con- 
sidered a  desirable  bishopric — seemed  imminent.  New- 
castle was  embarrassed  by  his  wife  having  in  an  un- 
guarded moment  promised  it  to  Hume,  Bishop  of 
Oxford  ;  but  in  a  letter  to  Archbishop  Seeker,  dated 
the  23rd  December,  he  admits  "  the  much  superior 

'  Letters,  vi.  35.  ^ Cooper's  Annals  of  Cambridge,  iv.  335. 

^  Burrow's  Reports,  iii.  161 7. 


320 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


pretensions  to  it  of  the  Bishop  of  Litchfield,  which,  in 
a  very  modest  manner  and  with  the  utmost  respect  to 
the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  he  states  in  a  very  strong  tho' 
very  true  hght."^  The  vacancy  at  Sahsbury  did  not 
come  till  six  months  later,  in  July  1766.  Newcastle 
was  then  on  the  eve  of  giving  up  the  Privy  Seal,  and 
Chatham  was  becoming  Prime  Minister,  but  Newcastle 
does  not  think  this  ought  to  hurt  CornwalHs'  chances  ; 
for  on  the  21st  July  he  writes  again  to  the  archbishop 
that  "  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury  was  dead,  that  the 
Duchess  of  Newcastle  had  been  promised  it  for  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford  "  ;  and  adds,  "Mr.  Pitt,  from  my  Lord 
Cornwallis'  attachment  to  him,  would,  to  be  sure,  be 
ready  to  serve  his  uncle  the  Bishop  of  Litchfield." 
Some  one  suggested  that  should  Salisbury  go  to  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford,  the  Deanery  of  St.  Paul's,  which 
Hume  held  or  would  be  released,  would  be  a  solatium 
to  Cornwallis.  Seeker  seems  to  have  been  employed 
to  sound  the  young  King  how  he  wished  the  posts 
filled,  and  on  the  25th  July  the  archbishop  writes  to 
Newcastle,  "  I  am  just  come  from  Court.  The  King  gives 
with  the  greatest  cheerfulness  and  strongest  expressions 
of  regard  for  your  Grace,  Salisbury  to  Hume,  Oxford  to 
Lowth,  St.  David's  to  Moss,  and  the  Deanery  of  St. 
Paul's  to  Cornwallis."  Cornwallis  was  annoyed  at  not 
getting  the  Bishopric  he  wanted,  angry  with  Newcastle, 
and  at  first  refused  the  Deanery.  Newcastle  did  not 
like  the  enmity  of  Cornwallis  or  of  his  family.  From 
July  1765  to  August  1766  he  had  the  Privy  Seal, 
and  he  was  more  or  less  in  a  position  to  give  away 
ecclesiastical  appointments.  He  thought  he  saw 
a  way  to  restore  Cornwallis'  good  humour.  Ely 
was  likely  to  be  vacant,  and  Newcastle  as  Chancellor 
of  Cambridge  University  had  a  special  interest  in  the 
filling  of  that  see.  He  writes  to  the  archbishop  on  the 
27th  August  ;  after  mentioning  the  probable  vacancy 
at  Ely,  he  goes  on  :   "  The  person  wished  for  by  the 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32972,  f.  320. 


1783]        MADE  DEAN  OF  ST.  PAUL'S  321 


University  and  intended  by  me  was  the  Bishop  of 
Litchfield,  and  tho'  the  bishop  and  his  whole  Family 
have  broke  off  all  correspondence  with  me,  that  does 
not  alter  my  opinion  of  his  general  merit.  ,  .  .  The 
famil}'  of  the  Cornwallis's  and  Townshends  are  so 
attach 'd  to  my  Lord  Chatham  that  I  shd  not  think 
that  he  wd  be  against  the  Bishop  of  Litchfield."  Seeker 
sees  the  Prime  Minister  and  reports  that  Chatham 
expressed  a  "  great  regard  for  the  Cornwallis  family, 
and  understood  the  bishop  to  be  a  very  worthy  man." 
"  I  cannot,"  says  the  archbishop,  "  entertain  the  least 
doubt  of  his  being  fixed  upon." 

However,  something  went  wrong,  and  somewhat 
sulkity  Cornwallis  fell  back  on  the  Deanery  of  St.  Paul's 
in  commendam,  to  which  he  was  appointed  on  the 
28th  November  1766. 

Newcastle  was  not  usually  wanting  in  tact,  but, 
in  an  unwise  moment,  he  congratulated  Cornwallis  on 
his  Deanery.  This  was  more  than  Cornwallis  could 
stand,  and  he  gave  Newcastle  a  "  bit  of  his  mind  "  in  a 
letter  which  is  a  disappointment  to  those  who  wish  to 
form  a  high  estimate  of  the  future  Primate. 

"  You  say,"  says  the  angry  prelate,  "  you  are  much 
rejoiced  at  my  having  accepted  the  Deanery  of  St. 
Paul's.  For  what  reason  I  know  not.  As  to  myself 
I  have  no  joy  in  it,  I  am  not  fond  of  expedients.  Had 
the  recommendation  to  it  come  from  your  Grace  by 
way  of  atonement  I  shd  have  rejected  the  Deanery. 
After  the  hard  treatment  I  had  met  with  I  could  not 
with  honour  have  accepted  it.  It  is  by  no  means  a 
preferment  either  agreeable  or  suitable  to  me.  It 
would  have  been  kind  of  your  Grace  not  to  have  kept 
me  so  long  in  suspense  with  regard  to  the  Bishopric 
of  Salisbury.  Had  you  told  me  it  was  a  real  promise, 
it  wd  at  least  have  mitigated  the  severity  of  the  dis- 
appointment. You  say  it  is  the  only  instance,  but 
seven  years  ago  you  gave  Worcester  to  the  Bishop  of 
Gloucester.    Surely,  my  Lord,  the  disregard  then  shew'd 


322 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


to  me  may  be  allow'd  to  have  given  just  cause  of  some 
dissatisfaction,  at  least  not  only  to  me  but  to  my  Family 
and  Friends.  It  certainly  did.  You  begged  forgive- 
ness :  it  was  immediately  granted,  and  the  hardship 
forgotten.  The  late  unfortunate  circumstance  brought 
it  back  to  my  mind."  ^ 

Cornwallis  seems  to  have  owed  his  elevation  to  the 
Primacy  to  the  friendship  of  the  Duke  of  Grafton — one 
writer  has  suggested — -for  his  nephew,  Earl  Cornwallis, 
but  more  probably  for  himself  and  his  family  generally. 
At  any  rate  there  is  some  evidence  of  a  personal  friend- 
ship between  Grafton  and  the  archbishop.  In  his  auto- 
biography, Grafton  speaks  of  him  as  "  my  friend  ;  and, 
as  we  shall  see, the  account  which  Bishop  Thomas  Newton 
of  Bristol,  author  of  Newton  on  Prophecy,  gives,  clearly 
attributes  Cornwallis'  elevation  to  the  Duke  of  Grafton. 
Augustus  Henry,  third  Duke  of  Grafton  and  Prime 
Minister  after  Chatham,  is  a  difficult  character  to  gauge 
with  complete  fairness,  though  the  late  Sir  Wm.  Anson's 
edition  of  his  autobiography  has  thrown  much  light 
on  the  man.^  If  half  what  Junius  says  of  the  Duke 
of  Grafton  be  true,  he  was  certainly  not  fit  to 
nominate  the  head  of  any  Church.  He  had  at  this 
time  separated  from  his  wife  and  formed  an  immoral 
connexion  with  Nancy  Horton  or  Parsons.  This  he 
maintained  for  a  time  and  was  not  ashamed  to  flaunt 
by  appearing  with  her  at  the  Opera  while  Prime 
Minister.  But  Sir  Wm.  Anson  thinks  he  has  not  been 
treated  with  complete  fairness  by  his  biographers  or 
historians.  He  thinks  he  was  a  nobleman  with  a  high 
sense  of  public  duty,  with  a  real  desire  to  use  his  powers 
and  his  position  for  the  good  of  his  country.  His  auto- 
biography shows  him,  says  Sir  William  Anson,  "  a  man 
whom  no  biographer's  enthusiasm  could  describe  as  a 
statesman  of  the  first  rank,  and  yet  it  sets  before  us  a 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus..  32976,  f.  458. 
^  Autobiograpy,  274. 

'  Autobiography ,  by  Sir  Wm.  Anson,  Bart,  1908. 


1783]     CANDIDATES  FOR  CANTERBURY  323 


character  not  very  common  in  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury." 

In  spite  of  his  profligacy  he  took  a  strange  interest 
in  rehgious  questions.  Indeed,  after  his  retirement 
from  office  in  1 783  and  for  the  last  twenty-five  years  of 
his  life  Sir  William  Anson  speaks  of  their  having  en- 
grossed him.  He  was  throughout  unorthodox.  He 
had  rejected,  when  Chancellor  of  Cambridge,  the  degree 
of  LL.D.  through  unwillingness  to  subscribe  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles.  He  tells  himself  in  his  auto- 
biography, as  we  shall  notice  later,  how  he  sympathised 
with  the  Feathers  Tavern  petition.  On  his  retirement 
he  became  a  professed  Unitarian  and  was  a  regular 
attendant  at  Essex  Street  Chapel. 

When  Seeker  died  the  Duke  was  Prime  Minister  for 
the  second  time.  Chatham  had  resigned  his  place  as 
leader  through  illness,  and  North  had  not  yet  come  into 
power  ;  and  in  default  of  a  first  Minister  to  the  mind  of 
George  iii.,  Grafton  held  the  post.  Of  candidates  for 
the  Primacy,  Terrick,  Bishop  of  London,  was  cer- 
tainly in  the  eyes  of  some,  if  not  of  the  public  generally, 
one.  Even  before  Seeker's  death,  viz.,  in  July  1768, 
Lyttelton,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  a  very  learned 
antiquarian,  writing  to  Dr.  Ducarel  of  Lambeth,  says  : 
"  The  account  you  give  me  of  the  poor  archbishop's 
condition  makes  me  expect  to  hear  of  his  death  every 
post.  I  understand  London  will  certainly  remove  to 
Canterbury."^  Horace  Walpole  says  rather  spitefully, 
after  Cornwallis  had  been  appointed, "  Terrick,  Bishop  of 
London,  the  most  time-serving  of  the  clergy,  was  sorely 
disappointed  in  missing  the  first  mitre  in  England." 

Bishop  Newton,  in  his  Life  and  Anecdotes,  gives — 
though  he  says  "  not  upon  his  own  certain  knowledge 
but  upon  as  good  authority  as  can  usually  be  had  in 
cases  of  this  nature  " — the  following  account  of  how 
Cornwallis  got  the  Primacy:  "When  Mr.  Grenville," 
who  was  a  friend  and  patron  of  Newton,  "  heard  of  the 
*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  313. 


324 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS 


[1768- 


death  of  Archbishop  Seeker  he  said  upon  it  that  if 
the  Bishop  of  London,  as  then  seemed  most  probable, 
should  be  translated  to  Canterbury,  he  was  pretty- 
confident  Newton  would  go  to  London.  The  Duke  of 
Grafton  was  at  that  time  the  first  Minister,  and  he  was 
determined  to  promote  his  friend  Dr.  Cornwallis,  Bishop 
of  Lichfield  and  Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  and  proposed  him 
for  the  Archbishopric  of  Canterbury.  The  King  would 
have  it  first  offered  to  his  old  preceptor  the  Bishop  of 
Winchester."  This  was  Dr.  John  Thomas,  who  in  1761 
had  been  appointed  Bishop  of  Winchester,  and  must 
not  be  confused  with  the  other  Dr.  John  Thomas,  who 
in  1774  became  Bishop  of  Rochester.  "This,"  Bishop 
Newton  goes  on,  "  was  readily  complied  with,  as  it  was 
thought  that  Winchester  would  even  be  more  agreeable 
to  Bishop  Cornwallis  than  Canterbury.  But  the  Bishop 
of  Winchester  was  unwilling  to  change  his  situation, 
and  then  mention  was  made  of  the  Bishop  of  London,  to 
which  nothing  was  objected,  as  it  was  conceived  that 
Bishop  Cornwallis  might  make  as  good  a  Bishop  of 
London  as  Bishop  Compton,  who  was  a  very  good  one. 
But  the  King  added  that  the  Bishop  of  Bristol  should 
succeed  the  Bishop  of  London.  This  would  have  dis- 
concerted the  whole  plan  of  the  Ministry,  which  was 
on  the  Duke  of  Grafton's  part  that  Bishop  Cornwallis 
should  be  promoted  to  either  Canterbury  or  Winchester 
or  London,  and  on  Lord  Gower's  part  that  Bishop 
Egerton  should  succeed  him  as  Bishop  of  Lichfield  and 
in  the  Deanery  of  St.  Paul's  ;  and  the  best  game  there- 
fore they  had  to  play  was  to  resume  their  original 
design  and  to  push  Cornwallis  for  Canterbury,  which 
was  no  sooner  assented  to  than  proposed." 

The  King  insisted  on  Newton  having  St.  Paul's. 
Bishop  Cornwallis  was  thereupon  declared  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury. 

Poor  Newcastle  had  wanted  to  make  up  his  quarrel 
with  the  Cornwallis  family.  A  year  before  he  had 
written  to  the  Bishop  of  Lichfield  and  Coventry  that 


1783I   AN  "UNEXPECTED  PROMOTION"  325 


he  would  "  take  every  opportunity  to  make  amends  for 
an  incident  "  (meaning  the  failure  to  give  Cornwallis  the 
Bishopric  of  Salisbury),  "  tho'  at  that  time  unavoid- 
able, which  gave  him  (Newcastle)  as  much  concern 
as  it  did  to  "  Cornwallis.^  And  now  on  the  12th  August 
1768  he  writes  again  :  "  No  one  rejoices  more  in  your 
promotion  to  Lambeth  .  .  .  acquaint  the  Duke  of 
Grafton  how  much  I  approve  the  measure.  I  don't 
mean  to  take  any  merit  to  myself,  for  I  have  none." 

Cornwallis  answers  :  "I  must  own  I  feel  myself 
very  unequal  to  so  high  a  station,  and  wish  I  could 
have  declined  it  with  propriety,  but  found  I  could  not 
as  things  were  circumstanced.  All  that  can  be  done 
now  is  to  exert  my  utmost  endeavours  to  answer  in 
some  degree  the  favourable  expectations  my  friends 
have  entertained  of  me."  ^  In  some  epochs — the  present 
perhaps — a  letter  acknowledging  an  appointment  to 
the  high  office  of  a  bishop  would  be  overful  with  pious 
and  religious  sentiments  and  expressions  :  Cornwallis' 
letter  errs  in  our  judgment  on  the  other  side.  It  would 
have  suited  without  altering  a  word  an  appointment 
to  a  chief-justiceship. 

On  the  12th  August,  Dr.  Cornwallis  kissed  hands 
on  his  appointment.^  The  appointment  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  looked  for.  Cornwallis  himself,  in  a  letter 
to  his  friend,  Sneyd-Davies,  written  in  September  1768, 
speaks  of  it  as  "  my  unexpected  promotion."  Mr. 
Charles  Godwyn,  a  learned  Fellow  of  Balliol,  of  episcopal 
descent,  writing  to  a  friend  in  August  1768  after  com- 
mending some  of  Seeker's  literary  work,  says  :  "  What 
learned  works  are  we  to  expect  from  his  successor? 
He  himself  is  a  person  quite  unexpected."* 

He  was  succeeded  at  Lichfield  by  his  nephew,  James 
Cornwallis.  Lord  Stanhope  in  his  Life  of  Pitt,  ii.  128, 
gives  as  an  instance  of  the  "  unsatisfactory  condition  " 

^  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  32990,  f.  411.  2  Ubi  supra,  f.  419. 

'Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  i.  837. 
*  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  viii.  255. 


326 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


at  that  time  of  the  Church  of  England  and  "  the  low 
tone  of  feeling  "  which  prevailed,  the  letter  of  this  same 
Bishop  James  to  Pitt  demanding,  almost  peremptorily, 
a  particular  piece  of  preferment.  Pitt's  answer, 
stating  that  "  further  intercourse  was  impossible 
until  the  letter  was  recalled,"  brought  the  bishop  to 
his  senses.  Public  opinion  had  but  little  opportunity 
in  those  days  of  expressing  itself  in  the  press  ;  but  the 
appointment  seems  to  have  excited  a  certain  amount 
of  unfavourable  comment.  In  the  number  of  the 
Gentleman's  Magazine  for  September  1768,  it  says  that 
"  the  clergy  cannot  be  otherwise  than  idle  if  they  see 
the  boys  of  yesterday,  if  the  sons  or  brothers  of  lords 
and  others  unknown  in  the  republic  of  letters,  fill  the 
dignities  of  the  Church  "  .  .  . ;  and  the  writer  adds,  "  it 
may  be  said  without  offence  that  except  the  Bishops  of 
Gloucester  (Warburton),  Bristol  (Newton),  and  Oxford 
(Lowth),  I  do  not  recollect  one  dignitary  of  any  rank, 
either  bishop,  dean,  or  prebendary,  promoted  within 
that  period  (the  last  seven  years),  that  has  ever  obliged 
the  world  with  one  page  of  their  writings." 

But  Cornwallis  soon  disarmed  criticism  by  his  polite- 
ness. Within  two  years  of  his  coming  to  Canterbury  one 
of  the  dignitaries  there  writes  :  "  The  archbishop  gives 
great  satisfaction  to  everybody  here  ;  his  affability  and 
courteous  behaviour  is  much  taken  notice  of  as  very 
different  from  his  predecessor's."  The  same  letter 
records  that  :  "  He  marked  his  first  visit  to  the  city 
of  his  see  by  conferring  three  degrees  immediately  on 
alighting  at  the  deanery."  ^  We  get  a  picture  of  Corn- 
wallis just  after  his  appointment  in  a  letter  from 
Dr.  Ducarel  to  Bishop  Lyttelton,  dated  iith  August 
1768.  After  congratulating  him  on  the  appointment  of 
Lyttelton's  particular  friend  to  Canterbury,  Ducarel, 
who  was  also  an  Etonian,  says  of  the  new  Primate  : 
"The  first  Etonian  (I  think)  who  has  attained  to  that 
high  dignity.   I  paid  my  respects  to  him  last  night,  and 

1  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iv.  647. 


i 


FREDliRlCK  CORNWAIJ.IS 

[  To  face  p.  326 


1783]    FEATHERS  TAVERN  ASSOCIATION  327 


he  has  been  generously  pleased  to  continue  me  librarian 
at  Lambeth  and  received  me  with  the  greatest  civility 
and  friendship."  The  two  went  on  to  talk  of  the 
appointment  of  secretary  to  the  archbishop — an  office 
Ducarel  told  the  new  archbishop  was  worth  between 
two  hundred  and  three  hundred  a  year,  paid  by  fees — 
"  generally  executed  by  a  deputy  who  received  a  third 
part  for  his  trouble  " — the  principal  being  generally 
a  relation  or  a  friend — the  last  two  were  both  nephews 
of  Archbishop  Seeker.  "  How  happy,"  says  the  rather 
greedy  Ducarel,  "  such  an  office  to  be  executed  by  the 
same  deputy  would  render  me,  I  leave  your  Lordship 
to  judge." 

The  early  years  of  Archbishop  Cornwallis'  Primacy 
were  disturbed  by  the  petition  to  Parliament  against 
Clerical  Subscription,  which  was  the  result  of  Arch- 
deacon Blackburne's  work,  The  Confessional,  which 
we  have  already  mentioned.  As  a  High  Churchman, 
Seeker  had  been  opposed  to  Blackburne,  and  had  been 
even  credited  with  writing  the  first  of  the  "  Three 
letters  to  the  author  of  the  Confessional'^ ;  but  the 
tendency  of  the  times  and,  perhaps,  the  low  standard 
of  zeal  and  learning  prevalent  among  the  most  highly 
placed  clergy  were  favourable  to  broad  and  lax  theo- 
logical views.  At  any  rate,  in  1771,  Blackburne 
published  Proposals  for  an  application  to  Parliament 
for  relief  in  the  matter  of  subscription,  humbly 
submitted  to  the  consideration  of  the  learned  and 
conscientious  clergy.  The  plan  proposed  was  to 
prepare  a  petition,  circulate  it  in  the  country  for 
eight,  six,  or  ten  months,  and  present  it  to  Parlia- 
ment.^ 

A  meeting  of  London  clergy  was  held  at  the  Feathers 
Tavern  on  17th  July  1771,  when  an  association  called 
the  Feathers  Tavern  Association  to  support  the  proposed 
application  to  Parliament  was  formed,  and  a  petition 
to  Parliament  drawn  up  by  Blackburne  was  agreed  on 

'Anson's  Grafton's  Autobiography,  268. 


328 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


and  was  circulated  for  signature.  The  petition  in  its 
main  part  ran  as  follows  : 

"Your  petitioners  apprehend  themselves  to  have 
certain  rights  and  privileges  which  they  hold  of  God 
alone — of  this  kind  is  the  exercise  of  their  own  reason 
and  judgment.  They  conceive  they  are  also  warranted 
by  those  original  principles  of  reformation  from  popery 
on  which  the  Church  of  England  is  constituted,  to 
judge  in  searching  the  Scriptures,  each  man  for  himself, 
what  may  or  may  not  be  proved  thereby.  They  find 
themselves,  however,  in  a  great  measure  precluded 
the  enjoyment  of  this  invaluable  privilege  by  the  laws 
relating  to  subscription  whereby  your  petitioners  are 
required  to  acknowledge  certain  articles  and  confessions 
of  faith  and  doctrine,  drawn  up  by  fallible  men  to  be 
all  and  every  one  of  them  agreeable  to  the  said  Scriptures. 
Restored  to  their  undoubted  rights  as  Protestants  of 
interpreting  Scripture  for  themselves  without  being 
bound  by  any  human  explanation  thereof."^ 

About  two  hundred  and  fifty  signed  the  petition, 
mostly  clergymen,  but  some  doctors  and  lawyers.  The 
signatories  were  doubtless  what  would  be  called  now 
Broad  Churchmen,  but  their  number  included  many 
men  of  high  character  and  of  learning,  such  as  Law. 
Lord  North  was  interviewed,  but  could  promise  no 
support  to  the  petition.  The  Methodists  and  Selina, 
Countess  of  Huntingdon,  opposed  it.  It  came  on  upon 
the  6th  February  1 772,  and  there  was  a  full-dress  debate 
on  it.  Sir  Wm.  Meredith  introduced  it,  and  it  was 
supported  by  Thos.  Pitt,  nephew  of  Chatham,  Dunning, 
Wedderburn,  and  Sir  George  Savile.  The  opposition 
was  led  by  Sir  Roger  Newdigate,  the  doughty  member 
for  Oxford  University,  who  was  supported  by  Lord 
North,  Fox,  and  Burke.  The  notes  to  the  Parlia- 
mentary Debates  give  an  account  of  the  debate  from 
a  letter  written  by  John  Lee,  afterwards  Solicitor- 
General,  to  a  friend  in  the  country,  from  which  the 

*  Anson's  Grafton' s  Autobiography ,  267. 


1783]  THE  PETITION  329 

following  is  an  extract :  "Nobody  but  Sir  Roger  Newdi- 
gate  defended  the  articles,  and  all  the  House  explicitly 
declared  it  was  foolish  to  require  subscription  at  the 
universities,  and  expressed  a  wish  it  might  be  laid 
aside  there.  After  a  very  firm  debate  the  House 
divided,  the  numbers  for  not  receiving  the  petition 
were  217,  for  receiving  it  71,  which,  considering  the 
influence  of  the  bishops  and  ministry,  and  the  character 
and  weight  of  the  minority,  was  thought  a  very  great 
affair.  This  scene  was  acted  yesterday,  beginning  at 
3  and  ending  at  11  o'clock." 

There  is  little  direct  evidence  of  Archbishop  Corn- 
wallis  taking  any  part  in  the  above  proceedings.  The 
Duke  of  Grafton  in  his  autobiography,  after  stating  that 
the  supporters  of  the  movement  were  not  unanimous 
as  to  the  best  mode  of  approaching  Parliament,  the 
meeting  at  the  Feathers  Tavern,  which  consisted  of 
some  hundreds,  preferring  to  petition  the  Commons 
directly,  and  that  part  which  met  at  Tenison's 
Library,  with  Mr.  Wollaston  of  Chiselhurst,  thinking  it 
to  be  more  proper  to  address  the  bishops  to  bring  the 
business  before  Parliament,  goes  on  :  "  From  the  Arch- 
bishop (Cornwallis)  Mr.  Wollaston  met  with  a  gracious 
reception,  though  no  answer  was  given  to  him.  But  from 
his  Grace,  with  the  Bishop  of  Peterboro'  and  some  other 
of  the  bishops,  we,  who  most  interested  ourselves  for 
reasonable  relief  to  the  clergy,  received  the  fullest 
expectations  from  their  Declaration,  and  assurance 
that  the  Bench  itself  would  take  the  matter  under 
consideration  trusting  that  they  might  be  able  to 
bring  about  the  object  desired  in  that  manner  which 
was  thought  to  be  most  judicious  in  a  civil  and  religious 
view."  From  the  above  we  may  surmise  what  seems 
probable  on  general  grounds  that  Cornwallis  would  be 
opposed  to  the  petitioners'  proposals.  He  seems  however 
now  or  a  very  little  later  to  have  intimated  that  he 
would  receive  favourably  a  petition  for  the  revision  of 
the  Liturgy;  at  any  rate,  such  a  petition  in  1772  was 


330 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


presented  to  him,  and  the  idea  of  it  is  said  by  the 
eminent  Toplady  to  have  emanated  from  Lambeth.^  So 
orthodox  and  evangelical  a  person  as  Porteous,  after- 
wards Bishop  of  London,  signed  it.-  The  archbishop 
however  found  that  his  fellow-bishops  were  not 
favourable  to  the  petition. ^  The  petitioners  were  not 
unanimous  as  to  the  relief  they  sought.  Some  thought 
only  the  primary  doctrines  of  the  Christian  creed 
should  be  subscribed  to  ;  others  suggested  a  general 
assent  to  the  Prayer  Book.  The  authorities  in  State 
had  still  the  fear  of  Sacheverell  before  them,  and  loved 
peace,  which  they  thought  meant  letting  things  alone. 
Blackburne  said  there  was  a  new  40th  Article  of  the 
Church  of  England,  Peace,  and  so  nothing  was  done. 
On  I  ith  February  1773,  Cornwallis,  having  been 
applied  to  for  his  final  decision,  announced  :  "I  have 
consulted  severally  my  brethren  bishops,  and  it  is  the 
opinion  of  the  Bench  in  general  that  nothing  can  in 
prudence  be  done  in  the  matter  that  has  been  sub- 
mitted to  our  consideration." 

Horace  Walpole  says  that  in  1770  Cornwallis  was 
persuaded  by  Lowth,  Bishop  of  London,  to  remonstrate 
against  masquerades.  "  That  knave,"  says  Walpole, 
"  the  Bishop  of  London,  persuaded  that  good  soul  the 
archbishop  to  remonstrate  '  against '  masquerades ;  but 
happily  the  age  prefers  silly  follies  to  serious  ones,  and 
dominoes  comme  de  raison  carry  it  against  lawn  sleeves."  * 
But  it  is  well  known  he  fell  under  the  censure  of  the 
celebrated  Selina,  Countess  of  Huntingdon,  for  the 
routs  which  he  or  his  wife  gave  at  Lambeth.  The 
Countess'  remonstrances  were  ill  received  by  the  arch- 
bishop, and  she  thereupon  sought  an  interview  with 
the  King,  which  resulted  in  his  addressing  the  following 
letter  to  the  Primate  : 

^  Anson's  Grafton' s  Autobiography ,  258. 

2  English  Church  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  ii.  442. 

'  Mahon's  History,  v.  301. 

*  Walpole's  Letters  by  Toynbee,  vii.  381. 


1783]     GEORGE  III.'S  REMONSTRANCE  331 


"  My  Good  Lord  Primate,— I  could  not  delay 
giving  you  the  notification  of  the  grief  and  concern 
with  which  my  breast  was  affected  at  receiving  authentic 
information  that  routs  have  made  their  way  into  yr 
palace.  At  the  same  time  I  must  signify  to  you  my 
sentiments  on  this  subject,  which  hold  those  levities 
and  vain  dissipations  as  utterly  inexpedient,  if  not 
unlawful,  to  pass  in  a  residence  for  many  centuries 
devoted  to  divine  studies,  religious  retirement,  and  the 
extensive  exercise  of  charity  and  benevolence.  I  add 
in  a  place  where  so  many  of  yr  predecessors  have  led 
their  lives  in  such  sanctity  as  has  thrown  lustre  on 
the  pure  religion  they  professed  and  adorned. 

"  From  the  dissatisfaction  with  which  you  must 
perceive  I  behold  these  improprieties — not  to  speak  in 
harsher  terms— and  on  still  more  pious  principles,  I 
trust  you  will  suppress  them  immediately,  so  that  I 
may  not  have  occasion  to  show  any  further  marks  of 
my  displeasure,  or  to  interpose  in  a  different  manner. 

"  May  God  take  your  Grace  into  His  Almighty  pro- 
tection.— I  remain,  my  Lord  Primate,  your  gracious 
friend,  G.  R.''^ 

In  a  contemporaneous  letter,  Mr.  Cole,  who  was  a 
great  scholar  and  litteratur  of  the  time,  says  :  "  No 
doubt  you  have  seen  in  the  London  Evening  Post  of  the 
last  fortnight  several  scurrilous  squibs  and  reflections 
on  our  Primate,  not  for  his  routs  at  the  palace,  but  for 
his  endeavouring  to  bring  folks  to  a  sense  of  their  duty 
and  decency.  In  the  last  week's  paper  it  is  repeated, 
and  the  archbishop's  lady  taxed  with  routs  on  a  Sunday. 
Though  I  had  formerly  the  honour  of  a  decent  famili- 
arity with  his  Grace  while  at  college,  and  have  all  the 
veneration  that  is  due  tanto  patri  ;  yet  if  the  fact  is 
true,  and  it  is  boldly  and  confidently  asserted  in  the 
Presbyterian  manner,  I  cannot  help  thinking  but  all  that 
is  said  is  proper  enough  for  such  anti-episcopal  carriage. 
I  have  myself,  as  William  Cole,  no  particular  objec- 
tion to  a  game  of  cards  even  on  a  Sunday  evening  ; 
but  as  vicar  of  a  parish  I  should  think  myself  highly 
*  Jesse's  Geo.  HI.,  ii.  58. 


332 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


blameable  to  do  so  in  my  parish,  or  as  a  clergyman 
anywhere  in  a  country  where  the  prejudice  is  so 
vehement  against  it — so  that  I  cannot  believe  the 
assertion." 

Dr.  Wickham  Legg,  in  his  recently  published  work, 
English  Church  Life  from  the  Restoration  to  the  Tractarian 
Movement,'^  raises  the  question  whether  the  real  offence 
of  which  George  iii.  complained  was  the  having  routs 
at  Lambeth  or  the  having  them  on  Sunday,  and  points 
out  that  in  the  royal  letter  no  mention  is  made  of 
Sunday,  and  that  George  iii.  himself  had,  and  stoutly 
upheld,  Sunday  bands  at  Windsor,  Weymouth,  and 
Kensington.  Dr.  Legg  seems  to  doubt  the  precise 
authenticity  of  the  royal  letter.  But  in  the  Lives  of 
the  Countess  of  Huntingdon  the  day  as  well  as  the 
place  of  the  routs  is  made  a  point 

The  year  1773  raised  the  question  of  giving  relief  to 
the  Dissenters.  The  course  of  legislation  during  the  pre- 
ceding ten  years  is  not  one  of  which  Churchmen  nowadays 
can  feel  very  proud.  No  doubt  quieta  non  movere  was 
the  statesman's  dearest  rule  about  this  time,  and  the 
great  majorit}^  of  High  Church  officials  considered  it 
one  of  their  first  duties  to  resist  any  encroachments 
on  the  property  or  on  the  dignities  of  the  Established 
Church.  Walpole  in  Anne's  days  had  repealed  the 
Schism  Act,  but  had  shrunk,  as  we  have  stated,  from 
touching  the  two  Test  and  Corporation  Acts  passed  in 
Charles  11. 's  reign,  when  the  nation  was  crazed  to  restore 
in  Church  matters  the  pre-Commonwealth  regime ;  and 
also  was  frightened  by  James  11.,  then  Duke  of  York's 
Roman  Catholic  proclivities.  Those  Acts  required  any 
person  before  taking  any  municipal  office,  however 
humble,  to  receive  the  Communion  according  to  the  rites 
of  the  Church  of  England  within  a  short  time  of  his  tak- 
ing office.    The  penalties  were  heavy.    A  defaulter  was 

ip.  241. 

2  Painter,  Life  and  Times  of  Countess  of  Huntingdon,  ii.  283 ;  Pitman, 
The  Countess  of  Huntingdon  and  her  Circle,  125. 


1783]  RELIEF  TO  DISSENTERS  333 


heavily  fined  and  was  practically  outlawed.  He  could 
not  take  a  legacy  or  be  a  plaintiff  in  the  courts.  The 
Government  as  an  irony  passed  a  Bill  annually  to 
indemnify  offenders  against  these  penalties.  In  1773  a 
Dissenters'  Relief  Act,  which  gave  them  relief  in  another 
way,  was  before  the  Commons.  To  obtain  the  benefits 
of  the  Toleration  Act  of  William  and  Mary,  a  dissenting 
body  had  to  subscribe  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the 
Church  of  England.  This,  not  unnaturally,  the  Dissenters 
felt  a  grievance,  and  proposed  to  substitute  for  Sub- 
scription a  Declaration  that  they  took  the  Scriptures  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments  as  the  rule  of  their  faith 
and  practice.  In  the  Commons  the  proposed  relief 
was  opposed  by  that  sound  old  Tory, Sir  Roger Newdigate, 
the  member  for  the  University  of  Oxford,  as  an  infringe- 
ment of  the  rights  of  the  Established  Church  and  a 
blow  at  the  foundations  of  religion  ;  but  Burke  spoke 
in  favour  of  the  Bill,  and  it  passed  the  Commons  in  all 
its  stages  by  large  majorities,  70  against  9.  In  the 
Lords,  however,  it  had  worse  luck.  The  bishops  were 
in  a  bellicose  mood.  Some  months  before  an  attempt 
had  been  made  in  the  Commons  to  repeal  the  Nullum 
Tempus  Act ;  in  other  words,  to  quiet  the  possession 
of  subjects  to  property  against  dormant  claims  of  the 
Church.  A  little  earlier  Parliament  had  quieted  the 
possession  of  subjects  against  dormant  claims  of  the 
Crown,  and  the  Church  it  might  be  thought  could  have 
submitted  to  a  similar  restriction,  but  Lord  North  saw 
great  danger  ahead,  and  the  Bill  was  lost  by  141  to 
117.  This  attempt,  however,  had  frightened  the 
bishops.  When  the  Dissenters'  Relief  Bill  came  up 
from  the  Commons  on  19th  May  1773,  Lord  Chatham 
spoke  in  support  of  it.  Cornwallis  does  not  seem  to 
have  spoken.  Markham,  the  Archbishop  of  York, 
was  an  extreme  Tor}^  He  had  preached  a  sermon 
practically  upholding  the  divine  right  of  Kings  and 
denouncing  the  founders  of  the  American  Republic 
as    rebels    of    the    worst    kind.     When  Burgoyne 


334  FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


surrendered  and  the  British  cause  was  admitted  to  be 
lost  by  every  one  except  by  the  obstinacy  of  George  iii., 
he  was  fairly  castigated  by  the  Elder  Pitt  in  the 
House  of  Lords.  But  Terrick  of  London  opposed  the 
motion.  Watson,  Bishop  of  Llandaff,  one  of  the  ablest 
and  fairest  of  the  prelates,  quoted  from  the  celebrated 
Dr.  Priestley's  publications  to  show  that  religion  was 
in  danger  of  being  swept  away  root  and  branch.  It 
would  seem  that  Chatham  was  horrified  by  the  state- 
ments quoted,  and  ejaculated  "  monstrous,"  "  horrible," 
"  shocking."  At  any  rate  the  Bill  was  lost  in  the  Lords 
by  102  to  29. 

Cornwallis  defended,  as  was  natural,  the  strong 
anti-Papal  feelings  of  Englishmen  of  that  day  in  the 
matter  of  public  worship.  In  1773  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds 
offered  the  Dean  of  St.  Paul's  that  the  Royal  Society 
should  at  its  own  expense  decorate  the  interior  of  St. 
Paul's  Cathedral  with  pictures  by  himself,  West,  and 
other  artists.  But  Cornwallis  and  Terrick,  Bishop  of 
London,  thought  that  the  people  might  regard  it  as  an 
artful  introduction  of  Popery,  and  opposed  the  scheme.^ 
But  we  must  not  hastily  set  him  down  as  an  ultra- 
Protestant. 

The  year  1776  saw  the  determination  by  the  Courts 
of  a  question  affecting  Cornwallis  as  well  as  his  pre- 
decessors and  successors,  viz.,  whether  Lambeth  Palace 
was  chargeable  with  poor-rate.  There  was  a  feigned 
issue,  the  archbishop  being  plaintiff,  and  one  Suter,  a 
Lambeth  parish  official,  being  defendant.  The  point 
seems  to  have  been,  was  it  extra-parochial  ?  The 
palace,  it  was  said,  was  part  of  the  diocese  of  Canter- 
bury. Lambeth  parish  was  in  the  diocese  of  Win- 
chester. If  the  palace  were  part  of  the  diocese  of 
Canterbury,  it  could  not  be  part  of  the  diocese  of  Win- 
chester Porteous,  who  had  been  rector  of  Lambeth, 
was  a  witness  for  the  plaintiff,  and  testified  that  he 

^  Newton,  Life  and  Anecdotes,  141. 

*  See  Archbishop  v.  Suter,  Burrow's  Reports. 


1783]     A  THEATRE  FOR  MANCHESTER  335 


never  got  tithe  from  the  archbishop.  There  was  a 
learned  and  elaborate  argument.  In  the  end  the  arch- 
bishop won,  and  the  parish  was  condemned  in  costs 
amounting  to  £150,  raised  by  assessment  on  all  the 
inhabitants  and  paid  to  the  archbishop.  Though  rich, 
he  was  not  stingy,  especially  in  matters  affecting  the 
dignity  of  his  office.  He  seems  to  have  been  the  sort  of 
litigant  one  would  like  to  be  opposed  to — for  though 
victorious  all  along  the  line,  he,  a  few  months  later, 
presented  the  whole  amount  of  the  costs  to  the  parish 
and  paid  his  solicitor's  bill  out  of  his  own  pocket. 

Archbishop  Cornwallis  does  not  appear  to  have 
intervened  very  frequently  in  the  debates  in  the  House 
of  Lords.  In  the  hearing  of  a  case  about  tithes  the 
reports  show  him  to  have  spoken,  it  being  in  those 
days,  and  for  many  years  afterwards,  the  right  and 
practice  of  every  peer,  though  not  a  law  lord,  to  speak 
and  vote  in  the  hearing  of  legal  causes  in  the  House 
of  Lords. 

In  1775  we  find  him  taking  part  in  a  debate  which 
can  be  read  with  interest  even  by  readers  of  to-day. 
A  Bill  was  introduced  for  enabling  His  Majesty  to 
license  a  playhouse  in  the  town  of  Manchester.  Four 
years  before  a  Bill  had  been  brought  forward  for  a 
similar  license  for  Liverpool  and  had  been  passed  with 
a  protest  by  the  Earl  of  Radnor.  The  same  peer 
opposed  the  Manchester  Bill,  and  from  his  speech  on 
the  second  reading  it  appears  that  when  the  latter  Bill 
was  going  through  the  Commons  he  applied  to  Corn- 
wallis and  to  two  other  bishops  to  see  if  he  could  count 
on  their  support  to  his  opposition.  He  was  told  they 
were  resolved  to  give  it  every  opposition  in  their 
power.  But  on  the  first  reading  they  failed  to  oppose.* 
On  the  second  reading  Lord  Radnor  complained  of 
the  bishops'  conduct,  but  Terrick,  Bishop  of  London, 
and  the  archbishop  justified  themselves  on  the  ground 
that  the  second  and  not  the  first  reading  was  the 

'  Parliamentary  Reports,  xviii.  634. 


336 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


proper  stage  on  which  to  oppose  a  Bill.  Cornwallis 
said  that  whatever  might  be  urged  for  theatres 
being  established  in  London,  he  was  perfectly  con- 
vinced that  they  tended  to  idleness,  and  all  the  train 
of  evil  idleness  is  productive  of,  among  those  who 
were  destined  to  live  by  labour  and  industry.  "  I 
remember,"  proceeded  his  Grace,  "when  I  resided  in 
the  last  diocese  I  had  the  care  of,  I  went  to  a  great 
trading  town  (Birmingham)  to  attend  an  ordination  ; 
and  having  a  curiosity  to  inspect  the  manufacture 
carried  on  by  a  Mr.  Taylor,  upon  examining  the  works 
I  inquired  how  many  men  he  employed  ;  he  answered 
five  hundred.  '  And  where  are  they  ?  Is  this  a  holiday  ?  ' 
'  No,'  says  he,  '  but  we  have  a  playhouse  here ; 
men  were  at  the  play  last  night,  and  it  is  impossible 
to  get  them  to  their  business  for  two  or  three  days 
after  they  have  been  there.'  I  am  convinced,"  said 
the  archbishop  at  the  close  of  his  speech,  "  that  in 
trading  and  manufacturing  towns  its  effects  are  im- 
mediate and  pernicious  ;  I  am,  therefore,  strenuously 
against  committing  the  Bill."    But  the  Bill  passed. 

Cornwallis  published  little  if  anything;  but  in  1778 
Dr.  Ducarel,  who  was  at  one  time  librarian  at  Lambeth, 
published  a  list  of  the  various  editions  of  the  Bible 
and  parts  thereof  in  English  from  the  year  1626  to  the 
year  1776,  and  the  archbishop  bore  the  cost  of  an 
edition  (two  hundred  and  fifty  copies)  of  this  work. 

Cornwallis  is  said  to  have  supported  Porteous, 
just  made  Bishop  of  Chester  and  afterwards  Bishop 
of  London, 1  in  his  efforts  in  1777  to  get  Good 
Friday  better  observed.  This  was  met  by  a  cry  of 
"  No  Popery."  The  closing  of  shops  would  soon,  so 
it  was  said,  be  followed  by  the  elevation  of  the 
host  and  crucifix  to  prostrate  crowds  in  dirty  streets. 
Mr.  Hore  says  that  for  many  weeks  the  Presbyterian 
newspapers  were  full  of  abuse  of  Archbishop  Cornwallis 
and  his  family.    One  paper  complained  of  the  shutting 

'  Hore,  i.  452. 


1783] 


VISITATIONS 


337 


up  of  the  city  shops  on  Good  Friday  as  "  a  sanctified 
hypocritical  triumph  over  both  reason  and  Scripture — 
the  civil  and  religious  right  of  Englishmen — which  could 
not  but  be  highly  acceptable  to  tyrant  and  hypocrite 
of  every  denomination,  particularly  at  Court."  ^ 

The  Gentleman's  Magazine  for  1778  records  that 
Archbishop  Cornwallis  held  visitations  of  his  clergy  at 
Sittingbourne,  Canterbury,  Ashford,  and  Dover,  and, 
assisted  by  his  Suffragan  of  Rochester,  confirmed  at 
those  places,  and  at  Ramsgate,  Sandwich,  Hythe,  Rom- 
ney,  Cranbrook,  and  Maidstone.  The  same  journal  prints 
a  curious  incident  which  shows  that  archbishops  of  1900 
are  free  from  some  of  the  annoyances  of  their  prede- 
cessors of  a  century  and  a  half  ago.  The  archbishop  and 
his  wife  while  visiting  Dover  stayed  at  the  London 
Tavern,  and  were  much  alarmed  at  midnight  by  the 
door  of  their  room  being  burst  open  by  a  drunken 
English  squire  just  arrived  from  France,  who  persisted 
in  taking  possession  of  their  apartment,  which  his  Grace 
for  peace' sake  resigned.  "  Next  morning,"  the  chronicler 
adds,  "when  sober  he  offered  to  make  any  submission, 
but  his  Grace  would  not  see  him." 

In  1778  one  of  the  savagest  Acts  against  the  Roman 
Catholics,  that  which  enabled  a  son,  entitled  after  his 
father's  death  to  the  estates  of  which  his  father  was 
tenant  for  life,  by  turning  Protestant,  to  dispossess 
his  Roman  Catholic  father  during  the  latter's  life,  was 
repealed,  one  bishop,  Hinchcliffe,  the  Bishop  of  Peter- 
borough, being  found  liberal-minded  enough  to  speak 
in  its  favour  in  the  Lords. 

In  1779  the  Relief  of  Dissenters  came  up  again.  On 
loth  March,  Sir  Henry  Hoghton  moved  that  the  House 
should  resolve  itself  into  Committee  to  consider  a 
measure  for  the  relief  of  Protestant  Dissenting  ministers 
and  schoolmasters.^  Stout  old  Tories  like  Sir  Wm. 
Bagot  opposed  the  motion.    The  University  of  Oxford 

'  London  Evening  Post,  29th  May  1777. 
*  Gentleman' s  Magazine,  Dec.  1779,  p.  571. 


338 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS 


[1768- 


petitioned  against  the  Bill,  which  was  circulated  and 
which  brought  Dissenters  within  the  Toleration  Act  of 
William  and  Mary  on  their  making  a  solemn  declaration 
that  they  believed  the  Scriptures  to  contain  the  revealed 
will  of  God,  and  received  the  same  as  the  rule  of  their 
doctrine  and  practice  ;  and  their  representative.  Sir  R. 
Newdigate,  opposed  the  motion.  The  argument  that 
Dissenters  had  as  good  a  title  to  relief  as  had  been  acted 
on  in  reference  to  the  Roman  Catholics  in  the  last  Session, 
found  favour  with  the  House,  and  almost  unanimously 
it  was  resolved  that  the  House  should  resolve  itself 
into  Committee,  to  consider  means  for  giving  relief 
to  Protestant  Dissenting  ministers  and  schoolmasters. 
On  the  recommendation  of  the  Committee,  leave  to 
bring  in  a  Bill  was  given,  a  postponement  for  four 
months  being  lost  by  a  great  majority.  The  Bill 
was  read  a  first  and  second  time  without  debate.  In 
Committee,  the  University  of  Oxford,  true  to  Toryism, 
petitioned  against  the  Bill  unless  some  clause  should 
be  inserted  in  it  declaratory  of  the  Christianity  of 
those  who  were  to  be  relieved  by  it.  Lord  North  sup- 
ported the  petition  and  suggested  a  Declaration  as 
follows  :  "  I,  A.  B.,  do  solemnly  declare  that  I  am  a 
Christian  and  a  Protestant  Dissenter,  and  that  I  take 
the  Holy  Scriptures  both  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments as  they  are  generally  received  in  Protestant 
countries  for  the  rule  of  my  faith  and  practice."  Fox 
opposed  the  Declaration,  which  was  supported  by 
Burke;  but  the  Declaration  was  carried  by  88  to  58, 
and  on  Report  by  95  to  59.  The  Bill  having  been 
read  a  third  time  in  the  Commons,  was  carried  through 
the  Lords  without  debate,  the  Bishops  showing  silence 
instead  of  opposition  as  in  1773,  and  on  the  i8th  May 
received  the  Royal  assent. 

Perhaps  the  public  trouble  which  existed  in  1779 
tended  to  make  citizens  more  peaceably  inclined 
towards  their  fellow-citizens  even  though  differing  in 
their  forms  of  worship,  and  ready,  if   possible,  to 


1783] 


GORDON  RIOTS 


339 


relieve  their  scruples.  It  was  indeed  a  black  year  for 
England. 

Towards  the  end  of  Cornwallis'  Primacy,  London  was 
disturbed  by  the  Gordon  Riots.    Two  years  before  Sir 
George  Savile  had  carried  the  measure  we  have  mentioned 
relieving  the  Roman  Catholics  of  some  of  their  disabilities. 
We  of  this  later  age  have  forgotten  the  severity  of 
the  laws  then  existing  against  Papists.     A  Roman 
Catholic  keeping  a  school  was  liable  to  perpetual  im- 
prisonment.   Roman  Catholics  were  incapable  of  taking 
by  descent  if  any  Protestant  next-of-kin  claimed  the 
inheritance.     A  Roman  Catholic  child  by  becoming 
Protestant    could    deprive   his   non-recanting  parent 
of  his  estate.    They  are  said  to  have  been  elated  by 
Savile 's  relieving  legislation  :  at  any  rate  the  "  No 
Popery  "  cry  was  raised  and  caught  on  well  with  the 
mob.  Mustering,  on  26th  June  1780,  in  St.  George's  Fields 
they  marched  in  three  parties  over  London  Bridge,  Black- 
friars'  Bridge,  and  Westminster  Bridge  to  the  Houses  of 
Parliament,  where  they  arrived  about  half-past  two .  The 
members  of  the  Legislature,  particularly  the  members  of 
the  House  of  Lords,  were  very  roughly  handled  by  the 
mob.    It  is  doubtful  how  far  Cornwallis  was  a  sufferer  at 
the  hands  of  this  particular  mob.    A  contemporary  print 
says  that  he  was  saluted  with  hisses  and  groans,  and  when 
he  got  out  of  his  carriage  to  avoid  greater  mischief  the 
crowd  compelled  him  to  cry  out  (which  he  did  in  a 
feeble  voice)  "  No  Popery,  no  Popery."    A  later  issue, 
however,  of  the  same  journal  says  this  is  a  mistake, 
and  that  his  Grace  was  "  so  far  from  being  ill-treated 
by  the  mob,  and  forced  to  cry  whatever  they  would 
have  him,  that  he  never  went  from  Lambeth  that  day." 
But  his  house,  if  not  he  himself,  got  attention  from 
the  mob.    Indeed  the  palace  at  Lambeth  narrowly 
escaped  destruction.    The  first  alarm  was  given  on 
Tuesday,  6th  June,  when  a  party  to  the  number  of  five 
hundred  or  more  who  had  previously  assembled  in  St. 
George's  Fields  came  to  the  palace  with  drums  and  fifes. 


340  FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


and  colours  flying,  crying  "  No  Popery."  Finding  the 
gates  shut,  after  knocking  several  times  without  obtaining 
any  answer,  they  halloed  out  that  they  should  return  in 
the  evening.  A  party  of  guards  one  hundred  in  number 
arrived  at  twelve  under  Colonel  Deacon,  but  the  mob 
paraded  round  the  house,  and  continued  to  do  so  the 
following  day.  In  this  alarming  situation  Archbishop 
Cornwallis  with  his  lady  and  family  were  with  great 
difficulty  prevailed  upon  to  quit  the  palace,  whither  they 
did  not  return  till  the  disturbances  were  entirely  subsided. 
Soldiers  remained  till  iith  August;  two  hundred, 
sometimes  three  hundred,  men  being  quartered  in  the 
palace.  Officers  were  lodged  in  the  best  apartment 
and  entertained  in  the  handsomest  manner  at  the  arch- 
bishop's expense  by  two  of  his  chaplains,  Drs.  Vye  and 
Lort.  The  "  soldiers  attended  chapel  morning  and 
evening,  and  with  their  wives  and  children  had  their 
meals,"  so  the  Chronicler  of  Lambeth  goes  on,  "  of  the 
best  provisions  in  the  great  hall.'  During  their  stay 
at  Lambeth,  from  6th  June  to  nth  August,  "  not  the 
least  complaint  could  be  made  of  irregular  behaviour  in 
any  individual."  Mobs,  it  should  be  remarked,  were  not 
unknown  at  Lambeth  :  they  had  been  there — whether 
they  were  for  the  Irish  or  not — in  1736. 

In  the  summer  of  1780  when  the  country  was  astir 
with  the  panic  caused  by  the  Lord  George  Gordon  Riots 
there  were  proceedings  in  both  Houses  of  Parliament  with 
reference  to  the  suggested  repeal  of  the  Act  of  1778  by 
which  toleration  was  extended  to  Roman  Catholics. 
Sir  George  Savile  introduced  a  Bill,  which  passed  the 
Commons,  prohibiting  Roman  Catholics  from  teaching  or 
undertaking  the  education  of  the  children  of  Protestant 
parents.  In  the  Lords  Cornwallis  professed  himself 
favourable  to  toleration  even  of  Roman  Catholics,  and  was 
ready  to  support  the  Bill  if  it  were  shown  that  Romish 
schools  had  increased  in  number.  He  stated  that  in- 
quiries directed  by  him  showed  that  the  total  number  of 
Roman  Catholics  had  not  increased  throughout  the 


1783]     BISHOP  WATSON  OF  LLANDAFF  341 


kingdom  generally,  and  that  there  was  only  one  new 
school  for  boys  at  Hammersmith.  The  Lord  Chancellor 
suggested  that  it  would  be  enough  to  forbid  Roman 
Catholics  keeping  boarding  schools,  and  this  was  agreed 
to,  but  the  next  day  the  archbishop  said  he  had  agreed 
to  this  inadvertently  and  required  day  schools  to  be  pro- 
tected.   The  Bill  seems  in  the  end  to  have  been  lost. 

A  sensible  speech  by  Cornwallis  in  opposition  to  Lord 
Thurlow,  in  which  the  archbishop  upheld  the  privileges 
of  the  University  press,  is  reported  in  the  Parliamentary 
Debates  for  1 781 . 

In  1782  the  celebrated  Bishop  Watson  of  LlandafT 
published  a  letter  to  Archbishop  Cornwallis  ^  recommend- 
ing a  new  disposition  of  Church  revenues  by  which  the 
bishoprics  should  be  rendered  of  equal  value,  and  the 
smaller  livings  be  increased  at  the  expense  of  the  rich 
endowments.  The  letter  was  answered  and  caused 
some  stir,  but  resulted  in  nothing  :  nor  was  Cornwallis 
the  man  from  whom  any  drastic  interference  with 
Church  property  was  to  be  expected.  Watson  had 
been  second  wrangler,  and  was  a  prominent  man  in 
the  second  half  of  the  eighteenth  century.  He  was 
Professor  of  Chemistry  at  Cambridge,  and  withal  a 
theologian.  One  of  his  pupils  at  Cambridge  so  admired 
him  that  he  left  him  ;£20,ooo,  a  reward  not  often  falling 
to  a  successful  don.  He  made  a  remarkable  speech  in  the 
House  of  Lords  in  favour  of  the  Union.  Though  bishop 
of  a  Welsh  diocese  he  resided,  and  defended  his  residing, 
permanently  at  the  Lakes. 

Watson's  pamphlet,  says  Dr.  Lort,  made  much  noise. 
"  All  the  friends  of  the  Established  Church  hang  their 
heads  at  it,  and  all  its  enemies  triumph  in  it."  Speaking 
of  this  pamphlet,^  Dr.  Lort  writes  on  i8th  March  1783  : 
"  The  poor  archbishop  to  whom  it  is  addressed  was 
taken  very  ill  on  Sunday  ;  he  is  better  to-day,  but  I 
do  not  think  him  out  of  danger.    Pray  God,  preserve 

*  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  viii.  142. 

*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  vii.  449. 


342 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


him  a  little  longer  to  ward  off  the  storm  that  seems 
gathering  around  us." 

As  he  advanced  in  j^ears,  Cornwallis  felt  the 
infirmities  of  old  age.  In  the  spring  of  1783  he  was 
confined  by  a  gouty  complaint  in  one  of  his  legs.  But 
this  so  passed  that  he  was  able  to  go  to  Court  on 
Thursday,  14th  March,  and  to  attend  the  House  of 
Lords  next  da}'.  It  was  noted  as  curious  that  his 
penultimate  predecessor,  Archbishop  Hutton,  who  died 
on  the  same  day  and  month,  twenty-five  years  before, 
had  also  attended  the  House  of  Lords  the  Friday  before 
his  death.  On  the  Sunday  morning  Cornwallis  attended 
prayers  in  Lambeth  Chapel,  and  though  slightly  unwell 
afterwards,  by  evening  had  apparently  regained  his 
usual  health.  On  Monday  morning,  however,  he  was 
seriously  unwell.  The  celebrated  Dr.  Heberden,  a 
great  physician  of  the  day,  with  other  doctors  were 
summoned  to  his  aid.  Blisters,  the  favourite  remedy 
of  the  age,  were  freely  applied,  but  though  more  hope 
of  recovery  was  felt  on  Tuesday,  he  sank,  and  died  on 
Wednesday  evening.  He  was  buried  at  Lambeth — 
not  at  Canterbury — following  in  this  the  example  of 
his  predecessors  since  the  Reformation,  Cardinal  Pole 
having  been  the  last  archbishop  buried  at  Canterbury. 
His  family  and  friends  chose  as  his  resting-place  a 
vault  under  the  altar  in  Lambeth  Church.  This  was 
the  holiest  spot  near  at  hand.  But  it  was  already 
occupied.  The  sexton's  men  in  digging  the  grave 
reopened  the  Reformation  struggles.  They,  without 
intending  it,  knocked  into  a  leaden  coffin  of  "  horse- 
shoe "  shape,  we  are  told,  and  in  this  were  found  the 
remains  of  Dr.  Thomas  Thirlby,  Bishop  of  Ely,  but 
deprived  in  1559.  Thirlby  had  a  somewhat  remarkable 
history.  He  is  said  to  have  been  the  only  Church  of 
England  Bishop  of  Westminster,  Henry  viii.  having 
designed  to  make  Westminster  Abbey  into  a  Cathedral. 
He  gave  a  conge  d'elire  to  the  chapter  in  favour  of 
Thomas  "  Thirlebye,"  and  he  was  consecrated  Bishop  of 


1783]         CORNWALLIS'  CHARACTER  343 


Westminster  on  19th  December  1543.  Edward  vi. 
removed  him  to  Norwich  in  1553,  and  in  1554  Mary- 
appointed  him  Bishop  of  Ely.^  But  he  could  not 
swallow  the  Reformation  doctrine,  the  faith  and 
practice  of  his  youth  and  early  manhood  having 
too  strong  a  hold  of  him.  So  after  Mary's  death  he 
was  deprived  by  Elizabeth  and  put  in  the  Tower, 
He  must  have  been  a  peacefully  minded  man  withal, 
for  Parker,  Reformer  as  he  was,  consented  to  take 
him,  as  well  as  Tunstall,  in  at  Lambeth  and  to  feed 
and  house  him  there  till  his  death.  The  flesh,  the  face, 
and  white  beard  were,  we  are  told,  in  a  wonderful 
state  of  preservation,  having  been  subjected  to  some 
preservative.  A  cap  of  silk  adorned  with  point  lace — 
but  which  had  lost  its  black  colour — was  on  the  head, 
resembling  those  seen  in  the  pictures  of  Archbishop 
Juxon.  A  slouched  cap  with  strings  and  the  crown 
sewn  in  was  under  the  left  arm. 

Cornwallis  seems  to  have  been  a  kindly  man  of  no 
great  talents  or  learning,  and  with  no  special  qualifica- 
tions for  high  ecclesiastical  office.  Horace  Walpole 
calls  him  a  prelate  of  inconsiderable  talents,  but  a 
most  amiable,  gentle,  and  humane  man,  and  in  a  letter 
to  Sir  Horace  Mann  on  his  being  made  Primate,  "  a 
quiet,  amiable,  good  sort  of  man  without  the  hypocrisy 
of  his  predecessor  "  (Walpole  was  always  the  enemy  of 
Seeker),  "  or  the  abject  soul  of  most  of  his  brethren." ^ 
In  another  letter  he  says,  "he  is  no  hypocrite  time- 
server  nor  high  priest.  I  little  expected  so  good  a 
choice."  Bishop  Newton,  the  author  of  the  work  on 
Prophecy,  in  his  Memoirs,  written  while  Cornwallis  was 
still  archbishop,  speaks  of  him  as  "  the  not  unworthy 
successor  of  Seeker,"  and  says,  "  he  has  greatly  improved 
Lambeth  House ;  he  keeps  a  hospitable  and  elegant 
table  ;  has  not  a  grain  of  pride  in  his  composition,  is 
easy  of  access  ;  receives  every  one  with  affability  and 
good  nature  ;  is  courteous,  obliging,  and  condescending, 
^  Allen's  History  of  Lambeth,  iii.  *  Letters,  vii.  216. 

23 


344  FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


and  as  a  proof  of  it  he  has  not  often  been  made  the 
subject  of  censure  even  in  this  censorious  age."  His 
biographer  says  that  he  discharged  the  duties  of 
Primate  with  attention,  punctuahty,  and  decorum. 
His  idea  was  to  support  the  existing  constitution  in 
Church  and  State.  "  In  shining  talents  and  extensive 
learning  other  prelates  may  have  been  superior  to 
him,"  —  but  good  solid  sense,  prudence,  affability, 
candour,  and  hospitality  are  claimed  for  him.  Dr. 
Samuel  Denne  gives  the  following  character  of  him — 
which,  he  says,  is  "  the  spontaneous  effusion  of  a  country 
vicar,  who  never  sought  or  received  His  Grace's 
patronage,  but  who  admired  and  loved  him  for  his 
amiable  and  endearing  manners."  He  says  :  "  There 
may  have  been  Metropolitans  superior  to  the  late 
archbishop  in  the  profoundness  of  their  erudition. 
His  Grace,  and  his  predecessor.  Archbishop  Herring, 
had  a  very  competent  share  of  human  learning.  But 
they  had  each  of  them  something  better.  To  the 
utmost  purity  and  benevolence  of  heart  they  added 
the  most  affable  and  engaging  deportment."  After 
saying  that  Cornwallis  had  been  respected  and  beloved 
at  Lichfield,  and  that  his  move  to  Canterbury 
had  made  no  change  in  "  his  liberality  of  soul," 
his  biographer  proceeds  :  "At  Lambeth  House  from 
the  instant  that  he  entered  its  walls,  that  odious  dis- 
tinction of  a  separate  table  for  the  chaplains  was 
abolished.  It  remained  for  an  archbishop  of  high 
birth  to  declare  that  they  should  be  constantly  seated 
at  the  same  board  with  himself.  His  board  upon 
public  days  was  princely.  His  hospitality  was  in 
general  as  noble  as  his  own  moderation  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  it  was  exemplary.  The  courtesy  with  which 
he  received  those  who  had  occasion  to  approach  him 
was  not  the  affected  politeness  of  a  Court.  It  was  the 
courtesy  of  religion  and  morality.  It  was  the  evident 
result  of  a  good  understanding,  and  a  consummately 
benevolent  heart." 


1783]    CROYDON  PALACE  TO  BE  SOLD  345 


Cornwallis  died  rich.  "  He  made  no  will,"  writes 
his  chaplain  Lort  to  Bishop  Percy,  "  since  he  came 
to  Lambeth.  His  options  devolve,  of  course,  to  Mrs. 
Cornwallis,  but  whether  he  left  any  verbal  directions 
to  her  concerning  them  I  have  not  learnt."  His 
portrait  by  Sir  Thos.  Lawrence  is  at  Lambeth. 

Cornwallis,  like  Seeker,  never  occupied  the  old  palace 
at  Croydon.  Why  Seeker  gave  it  a  wide  berth  we 
know  not.  The  ecclesiastical,  almost  monastic,  style 
of  its  old  buildings,  restored  by  Herring,  would  not 
have  been  distasteful  to  a  man  of  Seeker's  tastes.  It 
was  reputed  unhealthy.  The  ladies  of  Seeker's  family 
were  delicate,  if  not  actual  invalids.  Perhaps  the 
reason  lies  here. 

With  Cornwallis  the  reason  for  forsaking  Croydon 
may  have  been  different.  Its  neglect  since  Herring's 
days  would  not  tend  to  increase, its  attractions.  The 
archbishop's  lady  was  a  leader  in  society,  and  may  for 
this  cause  have  found  Lambeth  ten  miles  nearer  the 
centre  of  the  world  than  Croydon.  Indeed,  during 
Cornwallis'  reign  the  movement  for  altogether  severing 
the  connection  between  the  Primates  and  Croydon  old 
Palace  must  have  gathered  force  either  from  Cornwallis' 
initiative  or  elsewhere,  for  in  1780  a  Private  Act  of 
Parliament  was  passed  (20  George  iii.  c.  57)  for  vesting 
the  old  palace  and  two  closes  adjoining  in  the  Lord 
Chancellor,  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  of  the  King's  Bench, 
and  the  Bishops  of  London  and  Winchester  in  trust 
to  sell  the  same  and  apply  the  money  arising  thereby 
and  from  dilapidations  and  other  money  for  the  pur- 
poses therein  mentioned.  The  Act  then  states  that  the 
situation  was  bad  and  inconvenient  ;  that  there  was 
£5403,  3s.  3d.  of  South  Sea  Annuities  which  had  been 
purchased  with  money  allowed  by  the  Commissioners 
for  building  Westminster  Bridge  as  a  compensation  for 
the  horse-ferry  from  Lambeth  to  Milbank,  the  dividends 
of  which  were  received  by  the  archbishop  for  his  own 
use;  there  was  £is^4,  4S.  iid.  Consolidated  3  per 


346 


FREDERICK  CORNWALLIS  [1768- 


cents  purchased  by  the  archbishop  in  1769  with  money 
received  by  him  for  dilapidations,  and  which  with  ac- 
cumulated dividends  amounted  to  £22,60,  os.  3d.,  and 
that  the  archbishop  had  lately  purchased  the  leasehold 
interest  in  a  farm  called  Park  Hill  belonging  to  the 
see  within  half  a  mile  of  the  town,  and  very  proper 
for  building  thereon  a  new  palace  ;  the  Act  then  em- 
powered the  trustees  to  sell  the  palace  and  two  closes, 
or  pull  the  house  down  and  sell  the  materials  and  pay 
the  money  to  the  Accountant-General  of  the  Court  of 
Chancery  to  be  laid  out  in  £3  per  cent.  Consols,  and 
added  to  the  money  already  in  that  stock  and  a  palace 
to  be  built  on  Park  Hill,  the  dividends  in  the  mean- 
time to  accumulate.  The  venerable  pile  at  Croydon 
was  accordingly  sold  on  the  17th  October  1780  to 
Abraham,  afterwards  Sir  Abraham,  Pitcher  for  £2 $20} 
The  palace  on  Park  Hill  seems  never  to  have  been 
completed,  and  three  years  later  Archbishop  Corn- 
wallis  died.  During  Archbishop  Moore's  twenty-two 
years'  Primacy,  the  question  of  a  new  country-house 
for  the  Primate  seems  to  have  slumbered.  Perhaps 
for  some  reason  or  other  Moore  did  not  want  a  new 
house. 

It  was  not  till  1808,  as  we  shall  see,  three  years  after 
Manners  Sutton  had  become  archbishop,  that  Addington 
was  bought. 

The  subsequent  history  of  Croydon  old  palace,  with 
the  deeply  interesting  historical  associations  which  we 
have  noted  in  Archbishop  Herring's  life,  is  not  alto- 
gether creditable  to  the  zeal  of  Englishmen  generally 
for  historical  monuments.  The  purchaser  in  1780 
granted  a  long  lease  of  it.  In  the  hands  of  the  lessees 
and  their  under-tenants,  some  of  the  buildings  were 
pulled  down,  what  was  left  was  used  for  business 
purposes,  especiall}^  in  connection  with  linen  bleach- 
ing. On  the  grounds  houses  were  built.  Laud's 
chapel  was  for  some  time  a  girls'  national  school — 
*  Manning  and  Bray's  Surrey,  ii.  537. 


1783]      GIFTS  TO  LAMBETH  LIBRARY  347 


round  holes  being  cut  in  the  desks  of  the  stalls  to  hold 
the  girls'  ink-pots !  ^  Near  the  end  of  the  nineteenth 
century  the  lease  fell  in,  and  the  then  Vicar  of  Croydon, 
all  praise  to  him,  sought  to  secure  the  old  palace  site 
and  buildings  for  the  church  as  the  site  of  a  vicarage, 
etc.  But  his  efforts  were  unsuccessful  ;  a  museum 
was  attempted  without  success.  Only  the  munificence 
of  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  who  has  presented  the  palace 
to  the  Kilburn  Sisters,  saved  the  historic  buildings  from 
further  desecration. 

The  archiepiscopal  library  at  Lambeth  was  much 
benefited  by  the  generosity  of  Archbishop  Cornwallis, 
who,  besides  adding  thereto  many  valuable  books  in  his 
lifetime,  caused  a  very  curious  collection  of  old  printed 
tracts  and  pamphlets  (from  the  reign  of  Henry  vii.  to 
that  of  Queen  Anne)  which  long  lay  in  the  library  un- 
digested to  be  bound  in  sixty  volumes 

It  is  said  that  a  valuable  set  of  prints  of  all  the 
Archbishops  of  Canterbury  from  1504  was  collected  at 
Lambeth  by  Cornwallis After  the  archbishop's  death 
some  valuable  articles  were  presented  by  his  accom- 
plished lady,  who  took  great  pleasure  in  the  library  at 
Lambeth,  which  she  is  said  to  have  visited  almost 
every  day. 

^  Pelton's  Croydon.  *  Allen,  1809. 

'  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  iii.  505. 


JOHN  MOORE 


1 783-1 805 

John  Moore  was  born  at  Gloucester  in  1730.  His 
father  is  generally  said  to  have  been  a  butcher  at 
Gloucester,  but  he  is  entered  as  "  Mr. "  in  freehold 
registers,  and  as  "  gent"  "  in  the  records.  So  it  seems 
probable  that  he  may  have  been  a  substantial 
grazier. 

John  the  son's  name  appears  in  the  Freemen's  Roll. 
He  was  brought  up  at  the  Free  School  of  his  native  city — 
and  as  he  showed  signs  of  ability  he  was  sent  by  friends 
to  Pembroke  College,  Oxford,  whence  he  later  removed 
to  Christ  Church. 

He  graduated  M.A.  in  1751,  B.D.  and  D.D.  in  1763.^ 
He  seems  in  early  life  to  have  formed  a  friendship  with 
Dr.  Grey,  the  Rector  of  Hinton,and  his  wife,  who  was  a 
daughter  of  Mr.  Thicknesse.  In  the  Memoirs  published 
by  Philip  Thicknesse,  the  son,  an  account  is  given  of 
the  somewhat  romantic  marriage  between  Dr.  Grey  and 
Miss  Thicknesse.  Mr.  Thicknesse  had  a  living  near 
Steane,  where  resided  a  proud  stately  prelate.  Lord 
Crewe,  Bishop  of  Durham,  one  of  whose  chaplains  was 
Mr.  Grey.  Grey  was  sent  by  the  bishop  to  ask  why 
Thicknesse,  unlike  all  his  neighbours,  clerical  and  lay, 
had  failed  to  present  himself  at  Steane.  Grey  on  his 
visit  saw  Thicknesse 's  daughter,  a  very  beautiful  girl, 
in  the  courtyard,  and  said  to  Thicknesse,  "  Bless  me  it 
made  my  heart  leap  to  see  so  fine  a  girl  in  such  a  country 
village  !  "  Grey  repeated  his  visits,  and  the  pair  were 
married.    The  chronicler  says  that  in  early  life  young 

*  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  viii.  94. 
34B 


1 783-1805]      A  DISCREET  TUTOR 


349 


John  Moore  became  a  gargon  de  famille  at  Hinton,much 
esteemed  by  Dr.  Grey  and  his  wife. 

By  some  lucky  circumstance  he  was  introduced  to  the 
Duke  of  Marlborough  as  a  tutor  to  his  son,  Lord  Bland- 
ford.  According  to  Mr.  Thicknesse  he  owed  this  intro- 
duction to  Dr.  Grey  ;  but  Mr.  Nichols  says  this  state- 
ment is  not  correct,  and  gives  another  account  which  he 
believes  is  authentic.  While  at  Pembroke,  Moore  had  as  a 
tutor  a  Mr.  John  Hopkins,  who  was  afterwards  chaplain 
to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  and  Vicar  of  Cropredy.  The 
story  is  that  "  a  gentleman  (perhaps  the  steward)  who 
was  employed  to  look  out  for  a  fit  person  in  the  uni- 
versity to  be  private  tutor  to  the  family  at  Blenheim, 
after  some  disappointments  applied  to  Mr.  John 
Hopkins  of  Pembroke  ;  and,  as  he  was  talking  with 
him  on  the  subject  in  the  window  of  his  apartments  in 
Pembroke  College,  Mr.  Hopkins  said, '  I  do  not  think  you 
can  find  a  more  proper  person  in  the  whole  university 
than  the  gentleman  who  is  walking  across  the  quad- 
rangle ;  and  I  dare  say  he  will  be  glad  of  the  offer.'  He 
was  called  up,  and  accepted  the  proposal — which  led  to 
consequences  well  known  and  honourable  to  all."^  The 
pride  of  the  Duchess,  it  is  said,  required  that  the  tutor 
should  not  sit  at  the  same  table  as  herself,  and  he  was 
degraded  to  the  second  table.  His  revenge  came,  how- 
ever, for  on  the  death  of  the  Duke  the  haughty  dame  fell 
a  victim  to  the  tutor's  charms,  and  courted  him  to 
receive  her  hand.  Moore's  honour  and  good  feeling 
compelled  him  to  decline,  and  we  are  told  that  so 
sensible  was  the  Duke,  the  son,  of  the  generosity  of  his 
conduct  that,  as  the  first  token  of  his  gratitude,  he  settled 
an  annuity  of  ,^400  upon  him  and  rapidly  obtained  for 
him  very  valuable  Church  preferment. 

In  1766  he  was  made  a  Prebendary  of  Durham,  and 
in  1 771  Dean  of  Canterbury.  Moore,  from  the  time  of 
his  marrying  as  his  second  wife,  Miss  Eden,  was  on 
terms  of  affectionate  intimacy  with  her  brother.  Sir  Wm. 

'Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ix.  693. 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


Eden,  afterwards  first  Lord  Auckland,  a  man  of  great 
ability,  who  was  several  times  a  Minister,  and  several 
times  employed  on  important  foreign  missions.  The 
Auckland  Correspondence  now  at  the  British  Museum 
contains  many  dozens  of  letters  under  the  signatures 
successively  of  J.  Moore,  J.  Bangor,  and  J.  Cantuar. 
They  are  the  letters  of  a  man  of  good  wits,  but  they  do 
not  show  any  appreciation  of  piety  or  spiritual  endow- 
ments of  any  kind.  From  his  own  words  here  recorded 
we  judge  Moore  on  one  point,  and  that  an  important 
one.  His  view  of  high  office  in  the  Church  is  that  of 
the  darkest  period  of  the  eighteenth  century.  Church 
preferment  is  something  to  provide  a  man  with  high 
station  and  a  good  income,  and,  almost  above  all,  with 
the  means  of  providing  for  his  sons  and  relatives.  He 
discusses  the  merits  of  different  bishoprics,  deaneries, 
livings,  always  with  the  view  of  the  advantages  temporal 
and  social  to  be  got  from  them  ;  of  the  opportunities 
they  may  afford  for  religious  or  spiritual  work  to 
the  persons,  if  any,  to  be  ministered  to,  not  a  word. 
He  is  a  great  State  official,  and  according  to  his 
opinions  does  his  duty  as  such  :  nothing  more.  He 
becomes  a  nepotist  and  a  very  bad  one.  Throughout 
his  career  he  had  the  Marlborough  interest  and  the 
Eden  interest  to  back  him.  And  no  doubt  he  con- 
sidered from  the  first  that  with  his  gifts  and  his  con- 
nections he  was  the  man  to  receive  high  ecclesiastical 
preferment . 

Further  than  this  a  man  like  Moore,  who  felt  a 
mitre  his  due,  having  already  a  good  prebend  at 
Durham,  and  a  good  deanery  at  Canterbury,  was 
in  a  position  to  make  terms  if  not  to  barter.  "  How 
much  already  in  possession  must  be  given  up  ;  there 
are  bishoprics  and  bishoprics — '  small,'  '  middling,' 
and  '  pretty  good  ' — what  is  to  be  the  net  gain  on  a 
change  ?  " 

In  1772  he  writes  to  Eden  :  "  It  ought  to  be,  I 
suppose,  my  Deanery  and  a  small  Bishopric,  or  Durham 


i8o5]  A  BISHOPRIC  WON  IF  NOT  SOUGHT  351 


and  a  middling  one,  or,  if  both  Preferments  are  to 
be  given  up,  a  pretty  good  one.  .  .  .  Lord  North  must 
understand  I  will  not  be  a  Bishop  unless  he  contrives 
I  may  live  with  some  degree  of  comfort,  I  mean  without 
such  an  income  as  may  enable  me  to  support  my 
station."  ^ 

In  January  1775  he  is  astir  again  and  writes  to  Eden  : 
"  It  is  thought  the  Bishop  of  Rochester  can  last  but  a 
very  short  time  :  if  the  Duke  of  Marlborough  will 
move  on  this  occasion  it  will  at  least  bring  me 
forward."  ^ 

He  further  says  :  "  I  assure  you  upon  the  word  of  an 
honest  man  that  no  consideration  but  the  duty  I  owe  my 
children  should  make  me  take  a  seat  on  that  same 
Bench  ;  nolo  episcopari  is  an  old  story,  but  if  I  know 
myself  what  I  have  said  is  true.  The  more  I  know  of 
the  world,  the  less  I  expect  of  personal  satisfaction  in 
entering  into  the  bustle  of  it."^ 

In  a  later  letter  he  says  :  "  I  am  pleased  at  the  Duke's 
entering  into  my  affair  with  cordiality.  I  never  can 
deserve  the  warmth  from  any  man  upon  earth  that 
I  have  deserved  from  him." 

However,  his  hopes  were  fulfilled,  and  in  1775  he 
mounted  the  Episcopal  Bench — his  see  (Bangor)  being  so 
often  in  the  eighteenth  century  a  bishop's  first  and  the 
precursor  of  higher,  if  not  the  highest ,  dignities .  The  well- 
known  Dr.  Hurd  was  consecrated  Bishop  of  Worcester 
at  the  same  time  as  Moore  in  Lambeth  Chapel, 
the  sermon  on  the  occasion  on  the  subject  of  the 
Respective  Duties  of  Ministers  and  People  being 
preached  by  Dr.  Balguy,  Archdeacon  of  Winchester, 
who  was  named  as  successor  to  Bishop  Warburton  at 
Gloucester. 

It  was  an  age  of  verse,  and  the  promotion  occasioned 
the  following  jen  d' esprit  : 

'  Auckland  Corr.,  addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  34412,  f.  281. 
^  Vbi  supra,  34412,  f.  292. 

'  Ubi  supra,  34412,  f.  298.  v 


352 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


"  A  Word  of  Comfort  from  Bangor  to  Canterbury  on 
the  Loss  of  her  Dean  " — 

Cease,  Canterbury,  to  deplore 

The  loss  of  your  accomplished  Moore, 

Repining  at  my  gain, 
I  soon  may  have  most  cause  to  mourn. 
To  you  he'll  probably  return, 

With  me  will  scarce  remain. 

Bangor. 

which  was  thus  answered  : 

To  me  you  prophesy  our  mitred  Moore 
Revolving  years  may  probably  restore, 

And  thus  in  vain  attempt  my  tears  to  dry. 
I  scarcely  know  my  masters,  but  by  name. 
Triennial  visits  and  the  voice  of  fame, 

For  ah!  my  Palaces  in  ruins  lie. 

Canterbury.! 

The  reference  at  a  time  of  deadness  in  the  Church,  and 
a  century  and  a  quarter  before  the  restoration  of  the 
archbishop's  palace  at  Canterbury,  to  the  absence  of  any 
home  for  the  archbishop  there  is  interesting. 

One  thing  is  to  be  said  in  Moore's  favour.  He  did  not, 
as  some  other  Bishops  of  Bangor  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  leave  his  diocese  unvisited.  There  are  several 
letters  from  Bangor  ;  its  quiet  is  remarked  on.  He  was 
looking  to  move  from  there — upwards  if  it  might  be. 
Meanwhile  he  gives  a  pleasant  description  of  his  existence 
there  under  date  the  6th  September  1782.  "  My  life," 
he  says,  "  is  filled  up  by  looking  round  my  diocese  and 
endeavouring  to  civilize  it  a  little  and  by  another  em- 
ployment not  of  a  very  frequent  kind,  lucubrations  on 
the  elements  of  Greek  with  my  two  boys."  After  re- 
ferring to  expectations  from  Lord  Shelburne,  he  con- 
tinues :  "  I  am  doing  a  wiser  thing  than  encouraging 
expectation.  I  am  preparing  or  rather  prepared  not 
to  be  disappointed.    At  the  same  time,  shd  better  pros- 

*  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  iii.  219,  220. 


i8o5]  CANTERBURY  REFUSED  353 


pects  rise,  I  am  not  unprepared  for  them  neither.  But 
I  will  not  pay  the  price  of  self-reproach  for  any."^ 

Moore  seems  to  have  found  favour  at  Canterbury. 
Dr.  Beauvoir,  of  whose  father  we  have  read  in  narrating 
Wake's  correspondence  with  the  heads  of  the  Gallican 
Church,  and  who  became  one  of  the  six  preachers  at 
Canterbury,  writes  in  March  1 775  :  "  When  are  we  to  have 
a  new  Dean  ?   Send  us  Moore  back  again  with  his  mitre."  ' 

The  year  1781  was  a  time  of  distress.  War  with 
France.  The  Revolt  of  the  American  Colonies,  resulting 
in  the  War  of  Independence,  the  demands  of  Grattan's 
Parliament  in  Dublin  made  English  statesmen  anxious. 
A  General  Fast  was  decreed  on  the  21st  February  1781, 
and  Dr.  Moore,  the  Bishop  of  Bangor,  preached  before 
the  House  of  Lords  on  the  occasion. 

Just  after  Cornwallis'  death,  Fox  and  North  had 
formed  the  Coalition  Ministry,  the  Duke  of  Portland 
being  Prime  Minister,  and  shortly  afterwards  brought 
in  and  passed  through  the  Commons  their  India  Bill 
which  proposed  to  take  the  Government  of  India  from 
the  East  India  Company  and  give  it  to  seven  com- 
missioners appointed  by  Parliament.  George  iii. 
thoroughly  disliked  the  Bill,  and,  as  is  well  known,  got 
it  thrown  out  by  the  Lords,  and  a  few  months  after- 
wards made  the  younger  Pitt,  at  the  age  of  twenty-five, 
his  Prime  Minister.  By  the  desire  of  the  King,  who  took 
great  interest  in  his  ecclesiastical  appointments,  the 
Primacy  was  offered  to  Hurd,  Bishop  of  Worcester, 
whom  George  iii.  called  the  most  naturally  polite  man 
he  ever  knew,  but  who  was  the  disciple,  almost  the 
slave,  of  the  ungenial  Warburton,  and  then  to  Lowth, 
Bishop  of  London.  Hurd  thought  himself  too  old,  and 
was  also  influenced  by  his  love  of  scholarly  ease.  The 
Bishop  of  London  was  too  much  attached  to  and  inter- 
ested in  his  diocese. 

Nichols  says  that  Bishop  Hurd  had  "  the  offer  of  the 

*  Auckland  Corr.,  addl.  MSS.  Brit.  Mus.,  34419,  f.  26. 

*  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  ix.  356. 


354 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


archbishopric  from  His  Majesty  with  many  gracious 
expressions,  and  was  pressed  to  accept  it ;  but  honestly 
begged  leave  to  decline  it  as  a  charge  not  suited  to  his 
temper  and  talents,  and  much  too  heavy  for  him  to 
sustain  especially  in  these  times."  "  I  took  the  liberty," 
says  Bishop  Hurd,  "  of  telling  His  Majesty  that  several 
much  greater  men  than  myself  had  been  contented  to  die 
Bishops  of  Worcester,  and  that  I  wished  for  no  higher 
preferment."  The  King  was  pleased  not  to  take  offence 
at  this  freedom,  and  then  to  enter  with  him  into  some 
confidential  conversation  on  the  subject.  It  was  offered 
to  the  Bishop  of  London,  Dr.  Lowth,  and  refused  by  him, 
as  was  foreseen,  on  the  ground  of  his  ill-health.^  George 
III.  is  said  thereupon  to  have  asked  each  of  these  two 
distinguished  prelates  to  recommend  one  of  the  bishops 
to  him  as  being  in  their  judgment  the  fittest  for  the 
Primacy,  and  each  of  them  without  consulting  the 
other  named  Moore  as  the  fittest  man.^ 

There  is  a  concise  description  of  the  affair  by  the 
Rev.  Daniel  Watson,  a  Yorkshire  rector,  whom  the  great 
Bishop  Butler  patronised  :  "  Lowth  and  Hurd  have 
both  refused  the  Archbishopric  of  Canterbury,  and 
joined  in  recommending  Moore  (Eden's  brother-in-law) 
to  the  King,  who  in  the  present  interregnum  of  admin- 
istration has  some  will  of  his  own."  ^  Moore  was  accord- 
ingly appointed.  His  election  by  the  Dean  and  Chapter 
was  confirmed  at  Bow  Church  on  the  26th  April  1783, 
and  on  the  loth  May  he  was  installed  and  enthroned  at 
Canterbury.  It  is  interesting  to  note,  and  shows  in 
what  a  different  aspect  such  ceremonies  were  viewed 
a  century  and  a  half  ago,  to  learn,  as  we  do  from  the 
Gentleman's  Magazine  for  the  current  date,  that  all  these 
latter  ceremonies,  though  performed  with  due  solemnity, 
were  all  performed  b}^  proxy, — the  vice-dean,  acting  the 
part  of  the  archbishop,  being  placed  successively  in  the 

^  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  vi.  490. 

*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  vii.  449. 

•  Nichols'  Literary  Anecdotes,  viii.  336. 


i8o5]        TOO  KEEN  ON  PATRONAGE  355 


archiepiscopal  throne,  the  patriarchal  chair,  and  the 
dean's  stall,  and  afterwards  receiving  from  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Church  the  usual  profession  of  canonical 
obedience  in  the  chapter  house. 

Two  days  later  we  read  of  Moore  attending  the 
Latin  sermon  at  the  annual  meeting  of  the  London 
clergy  at  Sion  College,  of  which  the  journal  of  the  day 
quaintly  says  :  "  The  composition  was  strictly  classical, 
pronounced  with  such  a  pleasing  familiarity  as  delighted 
a  most  respectable  auditory." 

Shortly  after  his  promotion  appeared  "Bangor's  Word 
of  Comfort  to  Canterbury — No  Prophecy."    It  ran  : 

An  impartial  and  competent  judge  of  desert, 

At  such  a  conclusion  must  have  needs  been  expert, 

And  to  baffle  distraction  I'll  venture  thus  far. 

If  Moore  rose  like  a  meteor  he'll  shine  a  true  star. 

Two  letters  of  this  date  are  such  as  a  biographer  of 
Moore  would  like,  but  does  not  dare,  to  suppress. 

"  26th  April  1783. 

"  It  is  a  critical  moment  for  me.  Dr.  Stinton,  who  has 
a  very  large  living  in  the  archbishop's  gift,  is  in  so  much 
danger  that  his  death  is  probable  every  day.  I  shall  be 
confirmed  this  day,  but  there  being  no  Court  can't  do 
Homage  or  have  the  Temporalities  restored  till  Wednes- 
day. Say  nothing  of  the  circumstances  of  Dr.  Stinton, 
but  if  you  see  Lord  North  be  so  good  as  to  apprize  him 
that  I  wish  to  do  homage  certainly  on  Wednesday. 

"  J.  Cantuar,  Elect."! 

"        April  1783. 

"  I  have  been  with  Lord  North,  and  my  business 
will  be  finished  on  Wednesday  morning.  In  the  mean- 
time should  Dr.  Stinton  drop,  his  Preferment  in  the 
Archbishop's  Gift  will,  I  fear,  be  in  hasard,  though,  as  my 
confirmation  is  passed,  the  measure  would  be  somewhat 
violent  on  the  part  of  a  Government  to  which  I  don't 
owe  the  situation  .  .  .  what  interests  my  feelings  is 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  34419,  f.  183. 


356 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


that  the  preferment  would  at  once  reach  the  utmost 
wishes  of  my  sister's  husband. 

"  J.  Cantuar."! 

He  writes  on  Monday,  "  I  kiss  hands  to-day."  He 
seems  to  have  felt  the  troublous  character  of  the  times. 
Pitt  had  not  yet  commenced  his  long  premiership  :  Fox 
and  North's  coalition  was  struggling  on.  In  a  letter 
to  be  found  among  the  Egerton  papers,  and  written  in 
the  week  he  was  appointed  Primate,  Moore  says,  "  I  have 
been  answering  some  scores  of  letters."  ^  "  Had  I  a  ray  of 
hope  to  send  your  Lordship  that  could  in  any  degree 
brighten  the  prospect  of  public  affairs,  or  could  I  say  one 
comfortable  word  on  that  subject,"  he  would  continue 
his  letter  tired  though  his  fingers  were  of  writing. 

One  of  Moore's  first  acts  as  archbishop  was  to  give 
his  vote  in  the  House  of  Lords  in  favour  of  reversing 
the  judgment  of  Lord  Loughborough  in  the  cause  of 
Fytche  v.  Bishop  of  London.  The  point  at  issue  in  the 
cause  was  the  validity  of  a  bond  to  resign  when  called 
upon  given  to  a  patron  by  the  incumbent  of  a  living 
on  presentation.  It  had  been  a  common  practice  of 
patrons  to  ask  for  and  take  such  a  bond,  and  Churchmen 
of  the  better  sort  had  frequently  lamented  the  evils 
arising  from  the  practice.  Archbishop  Seeker  had  said  : 
"  The  true  meaning  of  a  bond  to  resign  is  to  enslave  the 
incumbent  to  the  will  and  pleasure  of  his  patron  whatever 
it  shall  happen  at  any  time  to  be.  So  that  if  he  demands 
his  legal  dues  ;  if  he  is  not  subservient  to  the  schemes 
political  or  whatever  they  are  which  he  is  required  to 
promote;  if  he  reproves  such  and  such  vices;  if  he  preaches 
or  does  not  preach  such  and  such  doctrines  ;  if  he 
stands  up  for  charity  and  justice  to  any  one  when 
he  is  forbidden,  the  terror  of  resignation  or  the  penalty 
of  the  bond  may  immediately  be  shaken  over  his  head." 
It  might  also  be  made  to  give  the  patron  the  same  results 

1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  34419.  f.  185. 

2  Egerton  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  2136,  f.  221. 


1 80S]  RESIGNATION  BONDS 


357 


as  if  he  sold  the  next  presentation  while  the  living  was 
empty. 

The  case  is  an  interesting  one  to  the  Churchman, 
as  well  as  to  the  lawyer  and  politician  :  to  the  Church- 
man because  a  great  triumph  was  gained  for  purity  of- 
Church  administration  over  the  fetters  of  real  property 
law  ;  for  the  lawyer  because  the  opinions  of  the  judges 
of  the  courts  below  and  also  of  the  judges  who  were 
summoned  to  advise  the  House  of  Lords  were  over- 
ruled by  that  House  ;  to  the  politician  because  the 
decision  of  the  House  was  arrived  at  on  votes  of  lay 
lords  and  bishops  as  well  as  law  lords  and  on  a  majority 
of  I  !  The  facts  of  the  case  were  simple  and  undis- 
puted. There  was  a  living  of  Woodham  Walter  in  the 
Diocese  of  London,  of  which  a  Mr.  Fytche,  in  right  of 
his  wife,  was  patron.  The  incumbent,  one  Dr.  Gower 
(oddly  enough  an  M.D.,  not  a  D.D.),died.  Fytche  had 
a  friend,  one  Eyre,  to  whom  he  wished  to  give  the  living, 
provided  Eyre  gave  him  a  bond  to  resign  the  living  at 
any  time,  which  Eyre  was  willing  to  do,  and  did.  Eyre 
was  then  presented  to  the  Bishop  of  London  for  institu- 
tion and  induction.  The  existence  of  the  resignation 
bond  was  admitted,  and  thereupon  the  bishop  refused 
to  institute  or  induct.  The  patron  brought  a  suit 
known  as  quare  inipedit  against  the  bishop  for  this 
refusal,  to  which  the  bishop  pleaded  that  the  bond  was 
simoniacal  and  the  presentation  accordingly  void.  The 
Court  of  Common  Pleas  decided  against  the  bishop, 
and  on  appeal  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  also  decided 
against  him.  Like  all  common  law  actions  of  that 
date,  except  to  a  very  trained  pleader,  the  issue  is  some- 
what obscured  in  the  report  by  the  technicalities  of 
pleading,  but  the  substantial  issue  appears  from  the 
Report  in  the  House  of  Lords  undoubtedl}^  to  have 
been,  was  the  bond  a  benefit  to  the  patron  so  as  to 
taint  the  presentation  with  simony  ?  The  brave  bishop 
brought  his  writ  of  error  by  way  of  appeal  to  the  House 
of  Lords,  and  what  happened  there  is  curious  and 


358 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


interesting.  The  judges  were  summoned  to  advise 
the  House,  and  after  full  argument  questions  were  put  to 
them,  of  which  the  chief  were  as  to  the  bond  being  a 
benefit  to  the  patron  and  the  bargain  accordingly  void 
under  the  Statute  against  simony,  31  Eliz.  Eight  judges 
attended  :  six  of  them  answered  all  the  questions  in 
favour  of  the  bond,  holding  it  not  to  be  a  benefit  to 
the  patron.  One  held  it  was  a  benefit,  but  not  corrupt ; 
the  eighth  held  it  a  benefit,  but  that  on  the  plead- 
ings the  bishop  could  not  raise  its  invalidity.  Thus 
all  the  judges  were  against  the  bishop,  and  in  favour 
of  the  decision  of  the  courts  below.  Those  were  the 
days,  however,  when  all  the  peers,  legal  and,  as  Lord 
Courtney-  calls  them,  "  unlearned,"  voted  on  judicial 
appeals  just  as  on  political  questions,  and  on  a  di\'ision 
nineteen — including  the  two  archbishops  and  a  dozen 
bishops — voted  for  reversing  the  judgment  of  the  King's 
Bench,  and  eighteen  in  favour  of  affirming  it.  Thus 
by  a  majority  of  one,  and  against  the  voice  of  all  the 
judges  who  heard  the  case,  the  Church  was  purged  from 
the  scandal  of  Resignation  Bonds. 

On  28th  June  1784,  the-chapel  at  Lambeth  was  the 
scene  of  a  ver\-  Episcopal  wedding.  We  have  alluded 
several  times  to  Markham,  Archbishop  of  York  :  per- 
haps many  of  our  readers  can  picture  him  and  his 
vigorous  features  from  the  fine  bust  in  the  vestibule  of 
the  library-  at  Christ  Church,  Oxford.  His  daughter 
now  married  a  son  of  Dr.  Edmund  Law,  Bishop  of 
Carlisle,  a  divine  often  referred  to  in  these  pages,  the 
ceremony  being  performed  by  the  Primate,  to  whom  it 
was  doubtless  a  pleasure  to  officiate  at  the  wedding  of 
his  college  tutor's  daughter. 

In  June  1786  we  find  Moore  speaking  in  the  House 
of  Lords  against  and  defeating  a  Bill  for  preventing 
frivolous   and   vexatious  suits  in  the  Ecclesiastical 
Courts  and  for  the  more  easy  recover^-  of  small  tithes 
In   spite  of  Moore's  success,  a  Bill  to  amend  the 

1  Pari.  Hist.,  xsvi.  128. 


i8o5]     TEST  AND  CORPORATION  ACTS  359 


proceedings  in  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts  was  reintro- 
duced into  the  Commons  the  following  session,  and 
reform  seems  certainly  to  have  been  needed.  On  the 
Regency  Bill  constituting  George  iv.  Regent  during 
the  King's  illness,  Lord  Stanhope  moved  to  prevent 
the  Regent  giving  the  royal  assent  to  any  Bill  inter- 
fering with,  among  other  Acts,  the  Act  of  Uniformity.^ 
Moore  appears  to  have  opposed  the  amendment  and 
to  have  upheld  the  provisions  of  the  Acts  attacked,  and 
the  amendment  was  withdrawn. 

In  1787  Moore  had  as  Primate  to  deal  with  the  claim 
of  the  Protestant  Dissenters  against  the  Test  and  Corpora- 
tion Acts.  Half  a  century  had  now  elapsed,  says  Lord 
Stanhope,  since  the  Protestant  Dissenters  had  applied  to 
Parliament  for  the  repeal  of  the  Test  Acts.  Most  of 
them  had  supported  Pitt  at  the  General  Election,  and 
they  now  thought  they  had  some  claim  on  his  favour. 
They  circulated  among  the  members  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  a  paper  entitled  "  The  Case  of  the  Protestant 
Dissenters  with  Reference  to  the  Corporation  and  Test 
Acts,"  which  is  set  out  in  vol.  xxvi.  of  the  Parlia- 
mentary History,  p.  781,  and  they  chose  as  their  spokes- 
man, Mr.  Beaufoy,  a  Churchman  and  a  supporter  of 
the  Government  .2 

Pitt  appears  to  have  felt  a  disposition  to  support 
their  claim,  says  Lord  Stanhope,  if  he  could  do  so  with 
the  assent  of  the  Church  of  England.  Moore,  at  the 
request  of  Pitt,  as  the  bishops  were  informed,  summoned 
a  meeting  of  the  bishops  at  the  Bounty  Office.  The 
question  was  asked  of  them,  "  Ought  the  Test  and 
Corporation  Acts  to  be  maintained  ?  "  Fourteen  bishops 
were  present .  Only  two,  Watson  of  Llandaff  and  Shipley 
of  St.  Asaph,  said  No  ;  and  Pitt  was  informed  of  the 
meeting's  decision. 

Moore  does  not  appear  to  have  altogether  favoured 
the  proposal.  He  writes  to  his  brother-in-law.  Lord 
Auckland,  and,  after  discussing  the  chances  of  Pitt 

'  Pari.  Hist.,  xxvii.  1282.  *  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  i.  336. 

»4 


36o 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


supporting  the  repeal,  says  that  he  "  has  good  reason  to 
be  sure  he  has  not  as  yet  at  least  made  up  his  mind  to 
do  so  "  ;  in  which  he  perhaps  refers  to  Pitt's  request 
to  him  to  summon  the  bishops  to  discuss  the  matter, 
and  goes  on  :  "  The  Speaker  and  Hatsell  tell  me  they 
have  no  idea  of  its  not  being  rejected  upon  the  first 
motion.  .  .  .  My  anxiety  on  this  subject  makes  me 
doubt  this." 

On  the  27th  March  1 787,  Mr.  Beaufoy  in  the  Commons 
moved  for  such  repeal,  and  in  a  speech  of  burning 
eloquence  emphasised  the  degradation  of  the  sacred 
rite  of  the  Holy  Communion  involved  in  making  it 
the  test  for  civil  offices  even  of  a  humble  grade,  calling 
it  "  a  monstrous  attempt,  as  irrational  as  it  is  profane, 
to  strengthen  the  Church  of  England  by  the  debase- 
ment of  the  Church  of  Christ."^  The  motion  was 
opposed  by  Lord  North,  but  supported  by  Fox. 

Pitt  said  he  could  not  with  decency  give  a  silent 
vote.  The  members  of  the  Church  of  England  part 
of  the  Constitution  would  be  alarmed  if  not  seriously 
injured,  and  their  apprehensions  were  not  to  be 
treated  lightly.  It  must  be  conceded  to  him  that 
an  Established  Church  was  necessary.  No  means 
could  be  devised  of  admitting  the  moderate  part 
of  the  Dissenters  and  excluding  the  more  violent ; 
the  bulwark  must  be  kept  against  all,  but  at  the 
end  of  his  speech  he  expressed  the  highest  opinion 
of  the  present  race  of  Dissenters  and  of  their  claim  to 
the  protection  of  the  Government.  Neither  he  nor  any 
of  the  speakers  against  the  motion  said  anything  about 
the  profanation  of  the  Communion  involved  in  the  Act. 
Mr.  Beaufoy 's  motion  was  lost  by  98  to  176.^ 

Moore's  reference  to  the  affair  in  his  letter  to  Auck- 
land is  not  very  clear  or  very  large-minded.  Under 
date  6th  April  1787  he  writes  :  "  You  will  observe  that 
the  Dissenters  are  firing  away  in  the  papers  at  Mr.  Pitt. 

1  Annual  Register  87,  p.  114. 

2  Parliamentary  History,  xxvi.  831,  gives  Nos.  as  98  to  176. 


i8o5]  AMERICAN  BISHOPS 


361 


That  contest  was  an  ugly  thing  to  happen,  and  fur- 
nished no  small  uneasiness  to  me  during  the  suspense 
of  it.  Had  it  ended  favourably  for  them  the  effects 
would  soon  have  been  serious  indeed — would  lead  me 
too  far."i 

It  was  during  Moore's  Primacy  that  the  efforts — 
the  patient,  persevering  efforts — of  Churchmen  in 
America  for  the  appointment  of  bishops  in  such  of  the 
American  Colonies  as  were,  speaking  broadly,  Epis- 
copalian were  crowned  with  success.  We  have  called 
attention  to  the  raising  of  this  question  from  time  to 
time  during  the  eighteenth  century.  We  have  seen 
how  Tenison,  Sherlock,  Butler,  Potter,  and  Seeker  had 
advocated,  even  pressed,  the  step,  and  how  it  had 
been  opposed  by  the  Nonconformists  both  in  England 
and  America,  mainly  because  they  feared  the  intro- 
duction into  America  with  bishops  of  the  temporal 
privileges  which  in  the  long  course  of  ages,  and  as  the 
result  of  the  course  of  English  history,  had  gathered 
round  an  English  or  an  Irish  bishop.  Now  we  have  to 
record  how  the  wishes  of  Churchmen  received  fulfilment. 

American  Independence  had  increased  the  difficulty 
of  the  Bishop  of  London  supplying  America  with  clergy- 
men. They  could  not  swear  allegiance  to  the  British 
Crown,  which  every  one  ordained  by  an  English  bishop 
had  to  ;  so  Lowth,  to  whom  some  candidates  for  orders 
from  the  Southern  States  had  applied  for  ordination, 
asked  for  and  in  1784  obtained  an  Act  to  meet  the 
difficulty.  It  is  described  in  a  contemporary  letter  by 
one  of  Moore's  chaplains,  who  says  : 

"  His  Grace  showed  me  the  short  Bill  which  receives 
the  royal  assent  to-morrow,  empowering  the  Bishop 
of  London,  or  any  other  bishop  he  may  appoint,  to 
ordain  Americans  or  others  belonging  to  foreign  juris- 
diction without  taking  the  oath  of  allegiance  now 
required."  ^ 

1  Addl.  MSS.  Brit.  Mus.,  34424,  f.  284. 

*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  vii.  465. 


362 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


As  far  back  as  April  1783  a  convention  of  clergy  of 
Connecticut  had  applied  to  the  Archbishop  of  York, 
Canterbury  being  vacant,  to  consecrate  Seabury  Bishop  of 
Connecticut.  They  urged  that  failing  such  consecration 
a  plan  was  on  foot  "  to  constitute  a  nominal  episcopate 
by  the  united  suffrages  of  presbyters  and  laymen."^ 
Trinity  Church,  New  York,  even  then  richly  endowed, 
supported  the  petition  of  Connecticut.  But  the  oath 
of  allegiance  created  a  difficulty.  A  bishop  ordained 
in  England  must  take  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the 
English  Crown.  Seabury  was  a  subject  of  the  United 
States,  and  would  take  no  such  oath.  So  recourse  had 
to  be  had  to  the  Scottish  bishops,  by  whom  he  was  con- 
secrated on  14th  November  1784. 

On  27th  September  1785  a  General  Convention 
of  the  Church  was  held  at  Philadelphia,  when  the 
Constitution  of  the  Church  and  the  revision  of  the 
Liturgy  were  discussed.  Clerical  and  lay  deputies 
attended  the  Convention  from  the  states  of  New 
York,  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  Mary- 
land, Virginia,  and  South  Carolina.  The  Convention 
first  made  up  a  "  Proposed  Book,"  being  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer  with  such  modifications  as  seemed 
requisite.  These  included  the  omission  of  the  Nicene 
and  Athanasian  Creeds  and  of  the  Descent  into  Hell 
in  the  Apostles'  Creed.  The  omission  of  the  first  four 
petitions  in  the  Litany  was  proposed  by  a  layman,  the 
Hon.  Mr.  Page,  afterwards  Governor  of  Virginia,  on  the 
ground  that  the  word  "  Trinity  "  was  unauthorised  by 
Scripture.  But  even  the  mover  was  half-hearted  in 
support  of  his  motion,  and  it  was  lost  without  a  division. 
They  also  addressed  to  the  archbishops  and  bishops  of 
England  a  formal  request,  dated  5th  October  1785, 
for  the  consecration  of  bishops  for  the  American 
Churches.  "  The  petition  which  we  offer  to  your  vener- 
able body  is  that  from  a  tender  regard  to  the  religious 
interests  of  thousands  in  this  rising  empire— professing 
*  Life  of  Bishop  White,  325. 


i8o5]  THE  PHILADELPHIA  CONVENTION  363 


the  same  religious  principles  with  the  Church  of  England 
— you  will  be  pleased  to  confer  the  episcopal  character 
on  such  persons  as  shall  be  recommended  by  this 
Church  in  the  several  states  here  represented."  True 
to  their  democratic  constitution,  the  Convention  placed 
on  record  its  "  desire  and  plan  that  the  bishops  asked 
for  should  have  no  temporal  honours  as  the  English 
archbishops  and  bishops  had  as  Lords  of  Parliament, 
and  that  their  reputation  and  usefulness  would  con- 
siderably depend  on  their  assuming  no  higher  title 
or  style  than  would  be  due  to  their  spiritual  employ- 
ments " ;  and  the  Convention  wished  that  the  bishops 
appointed  should  "  have  no  other  title  than  the  Rt. 
Rev.  A.  B.,  Bishop  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  C.  D.,  and  might  not  use  any  such  style  as  is 
usually  descriptive  of  temporal  power  and  pre- 
cedency." 

But  rumours  reached  the  ears  of  the  archbishops 
and  bishops  of  the  Mother  Church  that  views  Presby- 
terian and  almost  Socinian  in  their  character  had  found 
favour  in  the  Philadelphia  Convention.  The  arch- 
bishops and  bishops,  as  the  authorities  of  an  Estab- 
lished Church  are  rightly  wont  to  be,  were  cautious. 
They  addressed  a  reply  to  their  suppliants,  dated  24th 
February  1786,  in  which  they  said  that  the  address  of 
5th  October  1785  had  been  received  and  considered 
with  that  true  and  affectionate  regard  which  the  English 
Episcopate  had  always  shown  towards  their  episcopal 
brethren  in  America.  They  went  on  to  say  that  while 
making  every  allowance  for  the  difficulties  of  the  applic- 
ants' situation,  they  could  not  help  being  afraid  that  in 
the  proceedings  of  their  Convention  some  alterations 
may  have  been  adopted  or  intended  which  the 
difficulties  of  the  situation  did  not  seem  to  justify. 
The  archbishops'  and  bishops'  knowledge  of  these 
alterations  was  no  more  than  what  had  reached  them 
through  private  and  less  certain  channels.  The  reply 
went  on  :  "  While  we  are  anxious  to  give  every  proof 


364 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


not  only  of  our  affection,  but  of  our  facility  in  forward- 
ing your  wishes,  we  cannot  but  be  extremely  cautious 
lest  we  should  be  the  instruments  of  establishing  an 
ecclesiastical  system  which  will  be  called  a  branch  of 
the  Church  of  England,  but  afterwards  may  possibly 
appear  to  have  departed  from  it  essentially  either  in 
doctrine  or  discipline."  This  reply  was  signed  by 
Moore,  his  colleague  at  York,  and  seventeen  of  the 
bishops. 

The  Philadelphia  Convention  replied  on  26th  June 
1786.  This  enclosed  a  copy  of  the  American  proposed 
Ecclesiastical  Constitution  and  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  and  repeated  the  request  of  the  Convention  for 
the  consecration  of  two  bishops. 

This  communication  seems  to  have  crossed  another 
letter  from  the  two  archbishops.  This,  after  stating 
the  rather  piecemeal  receipt  in  England  of  the  American 
Liturgy,  went  on  :  "  Not  to  mention  a  variety  of 
verbal  alterations,  of  the  necessity  or  propriety  of  which 
we  are  by  no  means  satisfied,  we  saw  with  grief  that 
two  of  the  confessions  of  our  Christian  faith,  respect- 
able for  their  antiquity,  have  been  entirely  laid  aside  : 
and  that  even  in  that  which  is  called  the  Apostles'  Creed 
an  article  is  omitted  which  was  thought  necessary  to 
be  inserted  with  a  view  to  a  particular  heresy  in  a  very 
early  age  of  the  Church,  and  has  ever  since  had  the 
venerable  sanction  of  universal  reception." 

The  letter  went  on  to  say  that  in  the  hope  that  these 
defects  would  be  remedied  the  archbishop  had  prepared 
a  Bill  to  enable  them  to  consecrate  American  bishops, 
and  detailed  the  safeguards  required  to  secure  that 
proper  persons  only  should  be  offered  for  consecration. 

Moore  duly  obtained  from  Parliament  an  Act  (26 
Geo.  iii.  c.  84),  empowering  him  to  consecrate  "  to  the 
office  of  a  bishop  persons  being  subjects  or  citizens  of 
countries  out  of  His  Majesty's  Dominions,"  and  on 
4th  July  1786  he  sent  this  with  the  following  letter  to 
the  deputies  in  America  : 


i8o5]       WHITE  AND  PROVOOST  SAIL  365 


"  Canterbury,  4tk  July  1786. 

"  Gentlemen, — The  enclosed  Act  being  now  passed 
I  have  the  satisfaction  of  communicating  it  to  you.  It 
is  accompanied  by  a  copy  of  a  letter  and  some  forms 
of  Testimonials  which  I  sent  you  by  the  packet  of  last 
month.  It  is  the  opinion  here  that  no  more  than  three 
bishops  shd  be  consecrated  for  the  U.S.  of  America,  who 
may  consecrate  others  on  their  return  if  more  be  found 
necessary.  But  whether  we  can  consecrate  any  or 
not  must  yet  depend  on  the  answers  we  may  receive 
to  what  we  have  written. — I  am  yr  humble  servant, 

"  J.  Cantuar." 

The  Convention  met  again  at  Wilmington  on  loth 
October  1786.  The  conveners  felt  the  importance  of 
the  situation.  "  We  sat  up,"  says  one  of  them,  "  the 
whole  of  the  succeeding  night  digesting  the  determina- 
tions in  the  form  in  which  they  appear  in  the  journal." 

"  When  they  were  brought  into  the  Convention,  little 
difficulty  occurred  in  regard  to  what  was  proposed  con- 
cerning the  retaining  of  the  Nicene  and  the  rejecting  of 
the  Athanasian  Creed.  But  a  warm  debate  arose  on  the 
subject  of  the  Descent  into  Hell  in  the  Apostles'  Creed." 
Its  retainer  was  at  last  carried.  "  But,"  says  the  writer, 
"  the  result  was  not  owing  to  the  having  a  majority  of 
votes  ;  but  to  the  nullity  of  the  votes  of  those  Churches 
in  which  the  clergy  and  the  laity  were  divided."^ 

The  Convention  elected  three  divines,  William 
White,  Samuel  Provoost,  and  David  Griffith,  for  conse- 
cration as  bishops.  Griffith  was  ill,  but  on  Thursday, 
2nd  November,  White  and  Provoost  embarked  at  New 
York  with  the  necessary  testimonials  and  an  official 
copy  of  the  Act  of  the  Convention  modifying  the  proposed 
Prayer  Book.  White  wrote  from  England  to  his  com- 
mittee letters  telling  how  the  travellers  fared,  and  from 
these  we  get  the  following  : 

"  After  a  passage  in  which  we  had  some  tempestuous, 
although  for  the  most  part  pleasant  weather,  we  made 

*  Life  of  Bishop  White,  133. 


366 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


the  lights  of  Scilly  on  Monday,  20th  November,  and  the 
next  day  landed  in  good  health  at  Falmouth."  ^ 

Owing  to  "  sundry  incidents  "  they  did  not  reach 
London  till  29th  November.  On  3rd  December,  under 
the  friendly  auspices  of  Mr.  Adams,  the  American 
Ambassador,  they  paid  their  respects  at  Lambeth,  where 
they  had  "  a  polite  and  condescending  reception  "  from 
Moore — such  as  they  felt  "  entirely  answerable  to  the 
sentiments  which  we  had  been  taught  to  entertain  of 
this  great  and  good  archbishop." 

On  2 1  St  December  the  two  "  dined  at  Lambeth  with 
Moore — having  every  reason  to  be  satisfied  with  their 
reception  and  entertainment.  Moore  asked  for  a  short 
delay,  to  make  sure  all  his  brother  bishops  approved 
of  what  he  was  doing." 

The  Americans  visited  Lowth,  the  learned  Bishop 
of  London — but  he  was  infirm  and  ill,  and  was  seized 
the  following  day  with  the  attack  of  illness  of  which  he 
died. 

On  19th  February  they  attended  Moore  again  at 
Lambeth  ;  he  waived  the  omission  of  the  Athanasian 
Creed,  being  satisfied  that  the  doctrine  of  the  creed  is 
retained  in  many  places  of  the  Prayer  Book. 

He  was  nervous  about  the  easy  manner  in  which 
the  degradation  of  bishops  had  been  originally  proposed, 
and  when  that  article  had  been  altered  said,"  Yes,  and 
much  for  the  better."  He  excused  his  being  "  circum- 
spect," as  there  had  been"  reports  and  apprehensions." 

He  was  frightened  at  the  proposed  selections  from 
the  Psalms  ;  and  when  pressed  whether  he  objected 
to  the  omission  of  some  portions  of  the  Psalms  from 
public  worship  rather  evaded  an  opinion,  saying  that 
he  had  not  fully  considered  that  subject — but  feared  the 
sense  being  broken  by  omissions 

They  dined  again  at  Lambeth  on  a  public  day, 
and  before  dinner  followed  the  archbishop  through  a 
suite  of  rooms  till  they  found  themselves  in  the  chapel, 

^  Life  of  Bishop  White,  139.  ^  Ibid.,  149. 


i8o5]      CONSECRATION  AT  LAMBETH  367 


in  which  were  the  two  chaplains  in  their  surpUces.  One 
of  them  read  the  Litany.    Dinner  followed. 

On  2nd  February  Moore  introduced  the  two  "  to 
Geo.  III.  They  thanked  him  for  his  licence  to  convey 
the  episcopal  succession  to  the  Church  in  America." 
Geo.  iii.'s  reply  was,  "  His  Grace  has  given  me 
such  an  account  of  the  gentlemen  who  have  come  over 
that  I  am  glad  of  the  present  opportunity  of  serving  the 
interests  of  religion." 

On  the  4th  February  1787  they  were  consecrated  in 
Lambeth  Chapel  by  Moore,  Markham  of  York  and  the 
Bishops  of  Bath  and  Wells  and  Peterborough  assisting. 
Moss,  the  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  the  two  new 
bishops  were  specially  glad  to  have  joining  in  the  cere- 
mony, as  he  was  credited  with  having  felt  the  most 
strongly  about  the  American  omission  of  the  Descent 
into  Hell.  Drake,  one  of  Moore's  chaplains,  preached, 
his  text  being  "  Let  all  things  be  done  decently  and 
in  order."  Moore  had  asked  a  particular  friend  to 
preach  and  had  given  him  a  sketch  of  the  sermon  the 
archbishop  wanted.  But  domestic  calamity  prevented 
the  friend  coming,  and  the  chaplain  had  at  short 
notice  to  preach.  White  and  Provoost  were  styled 
respectively  Bishop  of  New  York  and  of  Philadelphia. 
They  were,  says  the  Gentleman's  Magazine,  "  elegantly 
entertained  by  His  Grace."  Their  own  account  is  that 
they  spent  the  remainder  of  the  day  with  the  arch- 
bishop and  bishops,  and  that  the  leave-taking  was 
"  affectionate  on  both  sides." 

The  Americans  insisted  on  paying  their  own  fees, 
£14,  3s.  id.,  which  were  not  allowed  by  Moore  to  in- 
clude the  fees  which  an  English  bishop  would  have  paid 
to  persons  of  the  Archbishop's  Court  and  of  his  household. 

The  newly  consecrated  bishops  left  London  on 
5th  February,  reached  Falmouth  on  loth  February. 
The  wind  was  not  favourable  for  sailing  for  seven  days  ; 
but  they  landed  at  New  York  on  the  afternoon  of  Easter 
Day,  after  exactly  seven  weeks'  voyage. 


368 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


Those  who  are  interested  in  the  earher  parts  of  the 
story  we  have  just  told  can  see  at  Lambeth  a  book 
containing  facsimiles  of  the  Documents — issued  by  the 
Historical  Club  of  the  American  Church. 

The  year  1 787  saw  also  the  consecration  by  Moore  of 
the  first  English  colonial  bishop.  There  had  been  for 
many  years  a  flourishing  Church  in  Nova  Scotia,  and  its 
numbers  had  been  increased  by  the  arrival  of  many 
American  loyalists  during  and  after  the  War  of  Inde- 
pendence. In  the  summer  of  1787,  Nova  Scotia  was 
created  by  Letters  Patent  a  see,  and  Dr.  Charles  Inglis, 
Rector  of  Trinity  Church,  New  York,  who  had  been 
obliged  to  fly  to  England  during  the  war,  was  appointed 
Bishop  of  Nova  Scotia,  and  on  the  12th  August  he  was 
consecrated  by  Archbishop  Moore  at  Lambeth  Chapel, 
the  assisting  prelates  being  the  Bishops  of  Rochester 
and  Chester,  and  the  preacher  White,  the  Laudian  Pro- 
fessor of  Arabic  at  Oxford.^ 

There  is  little  or  nothing  on  ecclesiastical  or  religious 
matters  in  Moore's  correspondence  with  his  brother-in- 
law.  The  letters  are  those  of  one  public  servant  of  the 
State  to  another,  full  of  keen  comments  on  passing 
events,  and  the  conduct  of  Ministers  ;  for  his  brother-in- 
law  especially  when  he  is  away  on  a  foreign  mission  the 
archbishop  always  holds  a  brief. 

His  incidental  comments,  however,  on  such  events  as 
Warren  Hastings'  trial  are  interesting.  He  writes  before 
the  trial  had  begun  on  22nd  May  1787  : 

"  It  was  a  melancholy  sight  yesterday  to  see  Hastings 
at  the  Bar.  The  general  appearance  in  a  very  full 
House  was  that  of  a  man  very  indifferent  and  uncon- 
cerned about  what  was  going  on,  and  his  appearance 
was  proper,  neither  daunted  nor  insolent."* 

Moore  earned  a  good  word,  and  it  must  be  counted 
to  his  credit,  from  William  Wilberforce.    That  great 

'  Gentleman' s  Magazine,  i  787,  pp.  735-830. 
*  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  34424,  f .  460. 


i8o5]  THE  SLAVE  TRADE 


369 


philanthropist  was  endeavouring  in  1787  to  get  a  Royal 
Proclamation  against  Vice  and  Immoralities  issued,  and 
to  form  a  Society  in  London  for  the  further  execution 
of  the  laws  against  these  things.  Wilberforce  writes 
to  one  of  his  sympathisers  in  the  North  on  the  29th  May 
1787  :  "  It  would  give  you  no  little  pleasure  could  you 
hear  how  warmly  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  ex- 
presses himself  ;  the  interest  he  takes  in  the  good  work 
does  him  great  credit,  and  he  assures  me  that  one  still 
greater  to  whom  he  has  opened  the  subject  in  form," 
approves  the  plan.^ 

Moore's  attitude  on  the  Slave  Trade,  which  began  to 
be  a  burning  question  early  in  his  Primacy,  is  disappoint- 
ing, and  seems  to  point  to  his  being  dominated  by  a 
dread  of  change  even  when  it  meant  the  abolition  of  a 
tremendous  evil.  1788  was  an  important  year  in  the 
development  of  the  Abolition  movement.  In  February 
Wilberforce  gave  notice  of  his  intention  to  move  the 
House  on  the  subject,  and  Pitt  set  up  a  Privy  Council 
Committee  of  Inquiry  on  it.  In  May,  in  Wilberforce 's 
absence  through  illness,  Pitt  moved  that  the  House  would 
next  session  take  the  whole  question  into  consideration. 
On  this  occasion  Sir  Wm.  Dolben  called  attention  to  the 
horrible  sufferings  of  the  slaves  on  their  passage  from 
Africa  to  the  West  Indies.  He  said  that  each  morning 
the  overseers  had  to  unchain  the  carcases  of  those  who 
had  died  from  their  sufferings  from  the  bodies  of  their 
fellow-sufferers  to  whom  they  had  been  fastened.  Such 
an  impression  was  made  on  the  House  that  very  shortly 
afterwards  Dolben  introduced  a  Bill  to  regulate  the 
transit  of  slaves  from  Africa  to  the  West  Indies.  It 
required  the  numbers  to  be  limited,  surgeons  to  keep 
accounts,  and  captains  to  take  sanitary  precautions. 
Pitt  supported  the  Bill,  and  it  became  law.  Moore  com- 
ments on  it  to  Auckland,  and  contents  himself  with 
saying,  "  It  is  a  cursed  trade,  but  too  deeply  rooted  to  be 
forcibly  and  at  once  eradicated."    In  1789  Wilberforce 

*  Li/fi  0/  Wilberforce,  i.  130. 


370 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


moved  his  celebrated  twelve  Resolutions  touching  the 
whole  slave  tral¥ic. 

The  proposal  to  repeal  the  Test  and  Corporation 
Act  was  brought  forward  again  in  the  session  of  1789  ; 
but  the  French  Revolution  had  frightened  people,  and 
postponed  the  granting  of  this  as  of  so  many  other 
reforms  for  about  thirty  years,  the  proposal  of  1789  being 
lost  by  122  to  102.^ 

In  May  1789  Lord  Stanhope  tried  to  introduce  a 
Bill  to  relieve  members  of  the  Church  of  England  from 
old  ecclesiastical  penalties  ;  he  sought  to  abolish  the 
laws  imposing  penalties  on  not  going  to  church,  on  not 
fasting,  on  excommunication,  and  also  to  abolish  penalties 
under  the  canons  of  the  Church.  On  the  second  reading 
Moore  spoke  and  saw  great  danger  in  the  repeal  of  the 
statutes  imposing  penalties  for  not  going  to  church  and 
in  allowing  free  discussion  of  religious  matters.  Though 
some  statutes  wanted  repealing,  he  objected  to  this 
Bill  going  any  further,  and  it  was  lost ;  Lord  Stanhope 
observing  in  reply  "  that  if  the  right  reverend  bench 
would  not  let  him  load  away  their  rubbish  by  cartloads 
he  would  endeavour  to  carry  it  off  in  wheel-barrows  !  " 

Of  the  kind  we  have  noted  are  Moore's  comments 
about  the  King's  health  on  his  first  attack  of  mental 
disturbance  in  the  winter  of  1788-89.  The  dislocation 
of  public  affairs  caused  by  the  King's  temporarj^  in- 
capacity was  made  all  the  more  acute  by  the  tension 
which  existed  between  the  Prince  of  Wales,  afterwards 
George  iv.,  and  his  father.  Fox,  of  course,  was  the 
Prince's  friend.  If  the  King  was  non  compos  there 
must  be  a  Regent  :  that  must  be  the  heir  to  the  throne, 
as  if  the  King  were  dead  :  should  such  Regent  have  the 
full  powers  of  the  Crown,  or  what  restrictions  should 
be  placed  on  them  ?  All  these  were  points  on  which 
Ministers  and  Parliament  had  to  adjudicate,  and  the 
fact  of  there  being  a  King's  party  and  a  Prince's  party 
made  the  adjudication  more  painful.  Even  when  the 
'  Pari.  Hist.,  xxviii.  i. 


i8o5]         ILLNESS  OF  GEORGE  III  371 


poor  monarch  was  examined  by  physicians,  there  was 
Warren  representing  the  Opposition,  and  Francis  Willis 
representing  the  Government. 

Fortunately  George  iii.'s  recovery  in  January  1789 
from  his  first  attack  of  illness  got  rid  of  a  very  difficult 
situation. 

It  was  in  the  preceding  November  and  December  that 
the  King  was  worst — feverish,  deranged,  sick  in  body 
and  mind.  There  is  a  letter  in  the  Egerton  MSS  in  the 
British  Museum  from  the  archbishop,  dated  the  8th 
November  1788,  in  which  he  says  :  "  My  anxieties  are 
very  great  indeed,  and  every  moment  increasing  from 
the  distance  I  am  at  from  the  subject  which  engrosses 
my  whole  heart  and  from  the  doubt  I  feel  about  the 
propriety  of  my  attending  in  person  at  Windsor.  I  am 
led  by  every  principle  of  attachment  and  respectful 
affection,  as  well  as  by  that  duty  which  peculiarly  be- 
longs to  my  situation,  to  make  a  humble  offer  of  mj' 
personal  attendance  and  services  in  any  possible  situa- 
tion in  which  they  may  be  acceptable."  He  speaks  of 
his  "  fear  of  increasing  public  alarm."  ^ 

On  the  29th  January  1789,  Moore  writes  : 

"  Dr.  Willis  insists  that  the  symptoms  of  the  malady 
are  become  much  more  favourable  than  at  his  former 
examination,  that  the  time  when  a  recovery  may  be  ex- 
pected no  mortal  man  can  say,  but  that  the  patient 
will  completely  recover  he  has  in  consequence  of  his 
experience  and  observations  the  strongest  ground  of 
hope — that  he  reads  with  attention  and  diligence  and 
converses  with  more  of  both  than  he  could  a  few 
months  ago." 

In  the  course  of  February  the  archbishop  reports  : 

"  I  saw  Mr.  Pitt  while  I  was  out.  He  was  just  come 
from  Kew,  and  brought  from  thence  everything  that  can 
encourage  hope. 

"  The  King  walks  with  the  Queen  daily,  converses 
and  lives  much  with  her  and  the  princesses  :  has  seen 

1  Egerton  MSS,  Biit.  Mus.,  2182,  ^.  58. 


372 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


others  of  ordinary  rank,  and  some  of  higher,  and  all 
this  with  perfect  calmness,  moderation,  and  accurate 
recollection." 

Some  of  our  readers  may  like  to  be  reminded  that 
Dr.  Francis  Willis  who  had  the  chief  charge  of  the 
King  was  a  clergyman,  not  a  doctor  at  all.  He  was 
Rector  of  Wapping,  and  during  twenty-eight  years  kept 
an  asylum  for  insane  persons  in  Lincolnshire.  His  two 
sons,  one  of  whom,  Dr.  John  Willis,  was  by  profession  a 
physician,  were  associated  with  him  in  charge  of  the 
royal  patient,  but  the  father  was  in  chief  charge.  He 
had  very  successfully  treated  the  mother  of  the  wife 
of  one  of  the  equerries.  General,  afterwards  Earl, 
Harcourt,  and  she  brought  forward  his  name.  Willis 
was  all  for  a  kind  treatment  of  the  case,  no  "  pretences, 
vexations,  or  unnecessary  restraints."^  The  King  had 
been  denied  a  razor  at  his  toilet,  and  a  knive  and  fork 
at  his  table.  Willis  at  once  restored  them,  and  with 
the  best  results. 

In  May  1791  Moore  found  himself  able  to  support 
both  by  his  voice  and  by  his  vote  the  measure  which 
Sir  John  Mitford,  afterwards  the  first  Lord  Redesdale, 
introduced  to  remit  certain  penalties  to  which  Roman 
Catholics  were  exposed.  Both  Pitt  and  Fox  supported 
the  measure.  The  penalties  were  so  many  that  the 
mere  enumeration  of  them  in  Burns '  Ecclesiastical  Law 
took  up  seventy  pages.  Mitford  proposed  by  his  Bill 
not  to  enable  a  Roman  Catholic  to  sit  in  Parliament  or  to 
fill  any  office  from  which  he  was  then  excluded,  but 
that  such  of  them  as  took  an  oath  in  the  form  provided 
by  the  Bill  should  be  exempted  from  the  severe  penalties 
which  a  series  of  statutes  imposed.  The  Bill  passed  the 
Commons  unanimously.  In  the  Lords  Moore  cautiously 
approved  the  Bill  in  its  general  principle,  though  he 
did  not  wish  to  "  destroy  wholesome  regulations  re- 
specting the  Protestant  Religion."  Old  Thurlow,  the 
*  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  ii.  2. 


i8o5]  TITHE  COMMUTATION  373 


grim  Chancellor,  happened  to  be  away  ill  that  day,  and 
the  Bill  got  through. 

In  1 791  Moore  was  the  recipient  of  a  letter  from  Pitt, 
proposing  a  scheme  for  the  Commutation  of  Tithes. 
The  subject  is  a  technical  one,  and  for  the  benefit  of 
our  readers  who  are  neither  landowners,  farmers,  nor 
lawyers  we  add  a  note  of  explanation.  Tithes  repre- 
sented the  one-tenth  of  the  produce  of  the  soil  which 
the  Mosaic  Law  devoted  to  the  service  of  God.  This 
involved  an  agreement  between  the  landowner  and  the 
titheowner  what  the  land  had  produced  and  what  was 
the  value  of  such  produce.  Two  difficult  questions  these 
on  which  quarrelling  was  easy.  So  even  in  early  days 
the  tithe  was  very  commonly  "  commuted  "  or  ex- 
changed for  a  money  payment  either  fixed  or  readily 
capable  of  being  fixed.  It  was  not  till  1836  that  an  Act 
of  Parliament  substituted  for  the  tithes  in  kind  a  rent- 
charge,  the  amount  of  which  was  determined  by  a 
seven  years'  average  of  the  wheat,  barley,  and  oats  pro- 
duced. 

Pitt's  letter  ran  : 

"  December  16,  1791. 

"  My  Lord,— I  took  the  liberty  of  mentioning  to 
your  Grace  not  long  since  that  some  suggestions  had 
been  brought  under  my  view  respecting  a  General  Com- 
mutation of  Tithes  for  a  corn  rent  conformably  to  a 
plan  which  was  adopted  in  the  instance  of  two  or  three 
parishes  by  separate  Enclosure  Bills  in  the  course  of 
the  last  Session.  A  paper  has  been  drawn  up  at  my 
desire  stating  shortly  the  principal  considerations 
which  seem  to  arise  out  of  this  proposal,  and  accord- 
ing to  your  Grace's  permission  I  have  the  honour  of 
enclosing  it."^ 

After  reserving  his  final  opinion  on  the  merits  of 
the  new  plan,  Pitt  goes  on  that  the  whole  subject  seems 
of  the  most  serious  importance,  and  "  there  are  appear- 
ances which  but  too  strongly  indicate  that  it  is  likely 

'  Stanhope's  Life  of  Pitt,  ii.  131. 


374 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


to  be  agitated  in  different  parts  of  the  country."  He 
invites  the  early  attention  of  those  who  wish  well  to  the 
Establishment  to  the  proposal,  and  concludes  :  "  Poss- 
ibly, as  the  Archbishop  of  York  is  now  at  Bath,  your 
Grace  may  have  an  opportunity  of  conversing  with  him 
and  showing  him  the  papers  which  I  should  be  very 
desirous  of  his  seeing. — I  have  the  honour,  etc., 

"W.  Pitt." 

Lord  Stanhope  says  : 

"  I  do  not  find  the  archbishop's  reply  among  Mr. 
Pitt's  papers.  Since,  however,  the  measure  in  question 
was  no  further  pursued,  it  is  plain  that  the  answer  must 
have  been  discouraging.  All  friends  of  the  Church  will, 
I  think,  join  in  lamenting  the  error  of  judgment  that 
was  here  committed.  Why  should  the  general  Com- 
mutation of  Tithes — a  measure  accomplished  with  such 
general  assent  and  such  excellent  result  some  forty 
years  later — have  been  without  necessity  and  through 
many  scenes  of  strife  laid  aside  when  a  public-spirited 
Minister  proposed  it  ?  " 

On  8th  April  1795,  Moore  married  the  future 
George  iv.  to  the  unfortunate  Caroline  of  Brunswick. 
He  thus  describes  the  ceremony.  The  evidence  by 
which  the  archbishop  satisfied  himself  that  the  bride- 
groom had  not  previously  married  Mrs.  Fitzherbert 
seems  to  us  weak.    He  says  : 

"  The  crowd  at  St.  James'  last  night  was  immense  j 

and  the  heat  intolerable.    I  felt  my  business  a  very  I 

solemn  one  indeed,  and  never  said  my  prayers  in  my  I 

life  under  more  impression  and  fervency.    The  Prince's  ' 
mind  was  certainly  and  very  seriously  affected  both  in 
the  service  and  after  the  service,  but  not  in  that  part  of 
the  service  from  which  one  might  be  led  to  fear  he  had 

upon  his  mind  a  feeling  that  he  had  before  bound  him-  i 

self  by  solemn  engagements.    There  I  saw  no  embar-  I 

rassment."^  I 

It  was  natural  that  Archbishop  Moore  should  be 
much  interested  in  the  suggested  marriage — for  matters 


1  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  34453,  f.  230. 


i8o5]  PITT  AND  MISS  EDEN 


375 


at  one  time  almost  reached  that  point — between  Pitt 
and  Miss  Eleanor  Eden,  Lord  Auckland's  eldest  daughter. 
Pitt  at  Holwood  was  a  near  neighbour  of  the  Aucklands 
at  Beckenham.  Miss  Eden  was  beautiful  and  of  superior 
mental  qualities.  At  the  end  of  1796  Pitt  was  in  love, 
but  he  was  pecuniarily  embarrassed  and  not  in  a 
position  to  make  an  adequate  provision  for  a  wife.  So 
the  matter  came  to  nothing,  and  not  unnaturally  a 
slight  estrangement  followed  between  the  Prime 
Minister  and  Lord  Auckland  and  his  family.  The 
archbishop  regretted  this,  and  on  the  17th  February 
1797  wrote  to  Lord  Auckland  : 

"  I  am  not  easy  at  the  separation  which  prevails 
at  present,  and  which  may  too  probably  continue  to 
prevail  if  not  speedily  put  an  end  to  by  increasing 
reluctance  on  each  side  to  take  the  first  step.  I  de- 
precate this  particularly  on  account  of  the  very  critical 
state  of  public  affairs  which  makes  it,  to  my  feelings,  of 
importance  to  the  country  that  such  a  separation  should 
be  immediately  put  an  end  to.  And  besides  that 
consideration  I  am  persuaded  that  it  will  be  a  relief  to 
both  your  minds  to  meet,  though  the  first  moment  will 
be  unpleasant.  .  .  .  You  wait  for  him  to  begin  :  I 
think  he  can't  do  it  :  he  does  not  know  what  he  is  to 
expect  in  the  meeting.  I  think  after  what  the  Speaker^ 
said  it  may  be  easily  and  naturally  set  right  in 
that  medium  without  any  step  on  your  part  unfit  for 
you  to  take  or  that  your  feelings  ought  to  revolt  at. 
I  think  what  the  Speaker  said  of  your  talking  together 
some  morning  was  in  its  intention  a  proposal,  and  its 
effect  rests  with  you.  He  is  a  right-minded  and  honour- 
able man.  ...  I  feel  what  I  am  saying  is  a  duty  to 
the  country  and  to  the  individuals  concerned  in  whose 
happiness  I  am  also  heartily  interested."  ^ 

1800  was  a  year  of  great  anxiety  and  distress. 
War  with  France,  anxiety  about  Ireland,  Habeas 
Corpus  again  and  again  suspended,  a  bad  harvest,  riots, 
great  distress. 

*  Mr.  Addington  knew  the  secret  of  Mr.  Pitt's  attachment. 
2  Addl.  MSS,  Brit.  Mus.,  34454,  f.  112. 

25 


376 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


On  the  20th  February  1800,  Moore  proposed  in  the 
House  of  Lords  an  agreement  to  be  signed  voluntarily 
with  the  object  of  reheving  the  prevalent  want.  After 
referring  to  the  scarcity  of  corn  and  the  inconveniences 
and  distress  of  the  lower  orders,  he  said  "  that  he  did 
not  recommend  direct  legislative  interference."  He 
proposed  an  agreement  by  which  the  signatories  should 
bind  themselves  not  to  consume  or  permit  to  be  con- 
sumed in  any  week  within  their  respective  families 
more  wheaten  bread  than  in  the  proportion  of  one 
quartern  loaf  for  each  individual,  and  to  discontinue 
within  their  families  all  pastry.  This  agreement 
was  carried  in  the  form  of  a  Resolution  and  ordered 
to  be  laid  on  the  table  for  signature  by  any 
lord. 

Moore  became  more  and  more  opposed  to  change  as 
old  age  came  on.  His  views  generally  fell  in  with  those 
of  his  distinguished  brother-in-law.  Lord  Auckland ; 
and  while  the  latter  was  a  colleague  and  supporter  of 
Pitt,  the  archbishop  supported  Pitt.  But  there  is  no 
doubt  that  he  interfered  at  the  end  of  1800  to  stimulate 
and  strengthen  George  iii.'s  opposition  to  Catholic  Eman- 
cipation. Though  there  was  no  engagement  that  the 
Union  of  Great  Britain  with  Ireland  passed  in  1800 
should  be  followed  by  Emancipation  of  the  Roman 
Catholics,  there  was  an  understanding  to  this  effect,  and 
Pitt  wished  it.  George  iii.  had,  of  course,  an  insuperable 
objection  to  any  such  measure.  Through  the  autumn  of 
1800  the  Chancellor,  Lord  Loughborough,  was  staying 
with  the  King  at  Weymouth  and,  disloyally  to  Pitt  and 
his  colleagues  in  the  Cabinet,  was  bolstering  up  the 
monarch's  obstinate  opposition  to  Catholic  Relief.  Lord 
Auckland  seems  to  have  worked  with  the  Chancellor. 
Perhaps  he  called  in  his  brother-in-law's  help.  Lord 
Stanhope  says  :  "  Certain  it  is  that  in  the  course  of 
this  autumn  the  archbishop  received  from  some  quarter 
a  private  hint  that  a  Roman  Catholic  Relief  Bill  was 
in  contemplation,  and  addressed  a  letter  to  the  King 


i8o5]  MOORE'S  CHARACTER  377 


at  Weymouth  strongly  deprecating  any  such  design."^ 
Backed  up  by  his  Primate,  George  iii. grew  more  obstinate 
than  ever,  and  on  the  5th  February  1801  Pitt's  splendid 
administration  of  more  than  seventeen  years  came  to 
an  end.^  Lord  Stanhope's  reflections  on  the  great 
benefits  that  would  have  accrued  to  the  nation  if  Catho- 
lic Emancipation  had  been  allowed  to  pass  in  1801,  and 
not  been  postponed  till  1 829,  will  now  command  almost 
general  assent.  Our  point  is  to  record  that  in  1801 
our  archbishop  intervened,  and  not  with  a  statesman- 
ship marked  by  any  great  wisdom. 

Moore  died  on  the  i8th  January  1805,  in  his  seventy- 
fourth  year  ;  and,  like  so  many  of  his  recent  predecessors, 
was  buried  at  Lambeth,  the  funeral  being  conducted 
with  great  solemnity,  with  a  long  procession  of  archi- 
episcopal  domestics,  male  and  female,  and  the  con- 
course of  a  large  crowd.  Moore  had  had  friends  among 
the  Royal  Family,  and  Royalty  was  represented  by  the 
Duke  of  Cambridge. 

His  biographer  says  of  Moore  that  while  archbishop 
he  "  avoided  all  other  activity  but  that  of  Christian 
piety  and  spiritual  duty.  He  scarcely  took  any  part 
in  political  disputes  ;  neither  did  he  adopt  any  steps 
to  inflame  the  minds  of  the  Dissenters  on  the  one  hand, 
nor  to  alarm  the  friends  of  Orthodoxy  on  the  other." 

He  only  printed  two  sermons  :  one  preached  before 
the  Lords  in  1 77 1 ,  and  the  other  on  the  Fast  Day  in  1 78 1 . 

Moore  was  well  spoken  of  by  the  great  Bishop  Beilby 
Porteous  of  London.  Writing  to  Bishop  Percy  of 
Carlisle  on  23rd  January  1805,  he  says  :  "  If  you  was  at 
all  acquainted  with  Archbishop  Moore,  who  was  a  very 
amiable  and  worthy  man,  you  would  be  concerned  to 
hear  of  his  death.  No  successor  is  yet  appointed,  but 
it  will  probably  be  either  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  or  the 
Bishop  of  Norwich."* 

Moore  was  twice  married.    His  first  wife  was  the 

»  Life  of  Pitt,  iii.  267.  » Ibid.,  iii.  281. 

*  Nichols'  Illustrations  of  Literature,  viii.  379. 


378 


JOHN  MOORE 


[1783- 


sister  of  Sir  James  Wright,  Chief  Justice  of  S.  Carohna, 
and  afterwards  resident  at  Venice.  His  second  wife 
was  the  sister  of  Sir  Wm.  Eden  and  Lord  Auckland, 
and,  we  are  told,  a  ver}'  celebrated  beauty.  Two  of  his 
daughters  died  of  consumption  :  he  left  five  sons,  for 
most  of  whom — according  to  the  ideas  then  and  for 
many  decades  afterwards  prevalent — he  provided,  by 
means  of  posts  at  his  disposal  as  archbishop.  Three  of 
his  sons,  George,  Charles,  and  Robert,  were  Joint-Re- 
gistrars of  the  Prerogative  Court  of  Canterbury.  George 
was  Rector  of  Wrotham  ;  Robert,  Rector  of  Latchingdon, 
Essex.  Two  other  sons,  John  and  William,  were  Joint- 
Registrars  of  the  Vicar-General's  Office.  One  of  his  sons 
died  in  1865.  Mr.  Hore,  in  his  History  of  the  Church 
of  England^  says  that  he  held  two  sinecure  rectories. 
He  was  Rector  of  Hunton,  Rector  of  Eynesford,  Rector 
of  Latchinford,  Canon  of  Canterbury,  and  Registrar 
in  the  Will  Office  in  the  Prerogative  Court  of  Canterbury. 

The  greatest  amount  of  the  Archiepiscopal  Revenue 
in  any  one  year  during  Moore's  tenure  of  office  is  stated 
to  have  been  3,000,  the  average  £i\,ooo.  The  first- 
fruits  to  the  Crown  and  fees  of  office  payable  by  Moore's 
successor  are  said  to  have  amounted  to  £1 2,000.  His  son, 
who  died  in  1865,  is  said  to  have  received  from  the 
Church  in  all  £753,647  and  his  average  income  to  have 
been  not  less  than  £12,000. 

Even  granting  that  £13,000  in  1800  was  in  income 
the  equivalent  of  £25,000  nowadays,  the  archbishops  of 
the  eighteenth  century  were  great  potentates,  if  not 
princes.  A  coach  and  six  horses,  a  private  State  barge 
on  the  Thames,  with  its  liveried  crew,  properly  belonged 
to  such  a  dignitary.  His  hospitalities  were  on  almost 
a  royal  scale,  ordinary  as  well  as  private.  Much  that  St. 
Paul  would  have  enforced  on  a  bishop  may  have  become 
blurred,  but  not  the  apostolical  hospitality.  There  is  a 
note  in  the  Library  at  Lambeth  that  in  the  olden  days 
when  the  presentations  at  Court  numbered  only  400, 

*  ii.  225. 


DINNERS  AT  LAMBETH 


379 


any  gentleman  who  had  been  presented  at  Court  could 
come  wearing  full  Court  dress  on  Tuesdays,  put  their 
names  down  before  ii  a.m.,  and  dine  at  Lambeth 
Palace.  In  Archbishop  Howley's  time,  when  the  number 
of  presentations  had  so  largely  increased  as  to  make 
this  privilege  impossible,  it  was  given  up. 

Not  much  of  Moore's  work  is  left  at  Lambeth.  Allen 
says  ^  to  the  Great  Gallery  he  added  a  bow  window. 

1  Allen,  185. 


CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON 


1805-1828 

In  Moore's  successor,  Manners  Sutton,  we  revert  to  the 
aristocratic  type  of  Primate,  of  which  CornwalHs, 
Moore's  predecessor,  had  been  a  specimen.  Though  he 
had  married  a  wife  of  very  good  family,  Moore  himself 
was,  as  we  have  said,  of  humble  birth.  In  the  line  of 
archbishops  he  is  flanked  on  either  side  by  one  born 
in  the  nobility. 

Manners  Sutton,  as  we  shall  detail  later  on,  seems 
to  have  owed  his  appointment  to  Canterbury  entirely 
to  the  personal  liking  of  George  iii.  for  him,  and,  as 
we  shall  tell,  also  for  his  wife.  The  two  men  had 
much  in  common,  and  on  questions  of  policy,  such  as 
Catholic  Emancipation,  Sutton's  views  were  entirely 
his  monarch's.  Like  Moore,  Sutton  held  the  Primacy 
for  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century.  In  home  affairs  it 
was  a  period — at  least  in  the  early  part  of  it — of  marking 
time,  if  not  of  absolutely  standing  still.  The  great 
law3^er,  John  Lord  Eldon,  a  great  favourite  of  George  iii. 
— when  he  pulled  the  Great  Seal  out  of  his  inner  coat 
pocket  and  gave  it  to  Eldon,  he  told  him  he  gave  it 
him  from  his  heart,  and  it  was  true — was  chief  Home 
Minister,  and  disliked  change  of  every  kind,  and  he 
had  the  memory  of  the  French  Revolution,  which  had 
thoroughly  frightened  the  average  Briton,  to  back  him. 
To  every  suggestion  of  reform  or  improvement  two 
arguments  were  put  forward  :  (i)  In  the  British  con- 
stitution and  in  the  British  laws  and  customs  as  now 
existing  Providence  has  given  you  the  best  machine 

for  producing  general  happiness  that  the  world  has 

380 


I805-I828] 


EARLY  MARRIAGE 


381 


seen  :  there  is  a  risk  in  changing  any  part  of  it.  (2)  If 
you  concede  this  reform  for  which  there  is  much  to 
be  said,  where  are  you  going  to  stop  ? 

There  are  intelHgent  persons  who  think  that  in 
these  reasonings  both  premises  and  conclusions  are 
open  to  question  in  every  part  ;  but  there  are  other 
persons,  as  or  perhaps  even  more  intelHgent,  who  in 
the  twentieth  century  use  the  same  arguments  in 
slightly  different  dress. 

Charles  Manners  Sutton  was  born  on  the  14th 
February  1755.  He  was  the  fourth  son  of  Lord  George 
Manners  Sutton,  the  third  son  of  the  third  Duke  of 
Rutland.  His  mother  was  Diana,  daughter  of  Thomas 
Chaplin,  Esq.,  of  Blankney,  Lincolnshire.  The  arch- 
bishop was  one  of  a  family  of  twelve,  seven  sons  and 
five  daughters,  of  whom  one  son  and  one  daughter 
died  young.  The  sixth  of  the  seven  sons,  Lord  Manners, 
became  Lord  Chancellor  of  Ireland.  The  third  son 
was  blown  up  in  H.M.'s  ship  Ardent  in  1754. 

Charles  Manners  Sutton  and  his  younger  brother. 
Lord  Manners,  were  both  educated  at  Charterhouse, 
and  both  went  to  Emmanuel  College,  Cambridge. 
Both  brothers  took  their  degree  in  1777,  the  younger 
brother  in  honours  outstripping  the  elder,  being  fifth 
wrangler,  while  the  future  archbishop  was  only  fifteenth. 

The  archbishop  was  a  believer  in  early  marriages. 
The  year  after  taking  his  degree,  when  he  was  only 
twenty-three,  he  married  Mary,  daughter  of  Thomas 
Thoroton  of  Sonviton  in  Nottinghamshire.  The  lady 
was  his  kinswoman,  and  there  is  ground  for  thinking 
the  young  pair  ran  away.  The  following  anecdote 
is  in  Lord  Eldon's  anecdote  book,  and  was  told 
by  him.  On  one  occasion,  says  he,  I  and  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Sutton)  and  many  other 
lords  were  with  George  iii.  when  His  Majesty  ex- 
claimed, "  I  dare  say  I  am  the  first  king  whose  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  and  whose  Chancellor  had  both 
run  away  with  their  wives.    Was  it  not  so,  Chancellor  ?  " 


382         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


"  May  it  please  Your  Majesty,  will  you  ask  the  arch- 
bishop that  question  first  ?  "  answered  I.  It  turned 
the  laugh  to  my  side,  for  all  the  lords  were  beginning 
to  titter.  If  this  story  be  well  founded — and  certainly 
John  Scott  ran  away  with  Bessie  Surtees — Sutton's  was 
a  runaway  match.  She  seems  to  have  made  him  an 
excellent  wife  ;  and  Sutton,  in  this  respect  rivalling,  if 
not  outstripping  his  own  father,  had  by  her  three  sons 
and  ten  daughters. 

He  proceeded  M.A.  in  1780,  and  was  ordained  priest 
and  deacon  by  Markham,  who  was  afterwards  Archbishop 
of  York  during  three  of  the  years  that  Manners  Sutton  was 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Markham  had  an  excellent 
reputation  as  a  scholar  at  Oxford,  but  while  archbishop 
put  forward  some  Divine  right  opinion  in  a  sermon. 
This  gave  rise  to  severe  comment,  the  elder  Pitt  being 
especially  critical  of  the  archbishop's  utterances.  In  a 
speech  made  after  the  news  of  the  English  disasters  in 
America  in  the  War  of  Independence  had  reached 
England,  Chatham  went  so  far  as  to  blame  Markham  for 
the  false  sentiments  which  were  so  widely  held  as  to 
England's  duty  to  her  American  colonists.  Markham, 
who  professed  himself  no  orator,  but  like  Manners 
Sutton  was  of  commanding  physical  presence,  hinted 
that,  though  archbishop,  he  might  be  driven  to  resent 
by  outward  action  some  insults  that  might  be  levelled 
at  him.  He  seems,  however,  to  have  confined  his 
vengeance  to  voting  with  three  other  peers  a  few 
years  later  against  a  public  funeral  being  given  to 
Chatham. 

In  1785  Sutton  succeeded  another  Sutton  in  the 
family  livings,  the  Rectory  of  Averham  with  Kelham, 
where  the  family  seat  was  situate  in  Nottinghamshire, 
and  Whitwell  in  Derbyshire,  his  brother  being  the 
patron  of  the  former  and  the  Duke  of  Rutland  of  the 
latter. 

In  1 79 1  he  was  appointed  Dean  of  Peterborough, 
and  in  the  following  year  he  was  raised  to  the  Episcopal 


i828]  POPULAR  AT  NORWICH  383 

Bench  on  the  death  of  the  excellent  Bishop  Horne, 
being  made  Bishop  of  Norwich. 

The  revenue  of  the  See  of  Norwich  was  small,  and  it 
was  reckoned  an  expensive  see.  In  1794  the  patrons 
and  friends  of  Manners  Sutton  obtained  the  Deanery 
of  Windsor  for  him  in  commendam.  Notwithstanding, 
Sutton,  while  at  Norwich,  got  into  debt.  Of  the  three 
causes  to  which  his  biographer  in  the  Gentleman'' s 
Magazine  attributes  this  condition,  the  first  two  are 
innocent  if  not  creditable,  viz.  "  the  diocesan's  dis- 
position "  and  "  the  claims  of  a  numerous  family." 
The  third  is  more  questionable,  "  the  habits  of  high 
life."  The  biographer  naively  adds  that  these  embar- 
rassments "  must  have  been  painful  to  one  who  knew 
that  it  was  the  duty  of  a  Christian,  and  much  more  of 
a  Christian  bishop,  '  to  owe  no  man  anything  '  ;  and 
on  his  subsequent  promotion  to  Canterbury  he  adopted 
with  a  becoming  energy  of  character  a  system  which 
enabled  him  to  discharge  all  his  incumbrances." 

While  still  Bishop  of  Norwich,  Manners  Sutton  seems 
to  have  attained  popularity  as  a  bishop.  Mathias, 
publishing  his  satirical  poem  "  Pursuits  of  Literature," 
in  1797,  says,  "  Sutton  ceased  to  claim  the  public  love," 
and  in  a  note  says  :  "  The  Right  Rev.  Charles  Manners 
Sutton,  Bishop  of  Norwich,  a  prelate  whose  amiable 
demeanour,  useful  learning,  and  conciliating  habits  of 
life  particularly  recommend  his  episcopal  character. 
No  man  appears  to  me  so  peculiarly  marked  out  for  the 
highest  dignity  of  the  Church  sede  vacante,as  Dr.  Sutton," 

While  at  Norwich,  Manners  Sutton  made  his  only 
appearance  in  print.  He  preached  at  Westminster 
Abbey  before  the  Houses  of  Parliament  on  the  Fast  Day, 
1794,  which  was  held  to  mourn  over  the  horrors  of  the 
French  Revolution  as  well  as  the  successes  of  the  French 
army, and  he  preached  before  the  Societyforthe  Propaga- 
tion of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts  in  1 79  7 .  Usage  required 
each  of  these  sermons  to  be  printed  and  published. 

In  1797  he  contributed  to  the  Transactions  of  the 


384 


CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


Linncean  Society,  vol.  iv.  p.  173,  "  A  Description  of  Five 
British  Species  of  Orabanche."  In  his  work  on  Bishop 
Blomfield  and  his  Times,  the  late  Dr.  Biber  alludes  some- 
what sneeringly  to  the  fact  of  an  archbishop  printing 
little  or  nothing  but  a  treatise  on  an  obscure  kind  of 
plant  ;  but  if  his  duties  were  not  thereby  neglected,  is  it 
a  disgrace  to  a  clergyman,  even  of  archiepiscopal  rank, 
to  be  a  competent  botanist  ? 

Planted  at  the  Deanery  at  Windsor,  Sutton  was 
close  to  his  royal  master  ;  and,  if  they  were  not  so  before, 
they  soon  became  fast  friends.  As  we  have  said,  there 
was  much  about  Sutton  to  please  and  attract  George  iii. 
Sutton  was  a  gentleman,  and  a  pleasant  one  ;  he  was  of 
good  reputation,  without  enough  genius  or  learning  to 
make  him  angular  or  unpleasant,  and  a  stout  supporter 
of  things  as  they  were.  He  was  of  fine  dignified  appear- 
ance, and  when  he  was  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  and 
Markham  of  York,  it  was  remarked  that  the  two  arch- 
bishops were  at  the  same  time  the  most  exalted  and  the 
tallest  prelates  of  the  Church  of  England.  It  is  even 
possible  that  the  steady  replenishment  of  the  nursery  of 
his  neighbour  at  the  Deanery  by  the  periodical  arrival  of 
little  daughters  may  have  interested  the  domestically 
minded  King,  who  was  himself  the  father  of  a  very  large 
family,  and  no  Malthusian  ;  and  may  have  pointed  to  the 
advantages  of  an  increase  in  the  happy  father's  income. 
The  presence  of  the  large  family  in  the  royal  mind 
seems  shown  by  the  conversation  with  Pitt  detailed  below, 
and  that  George  iii.  showed  interest  in  his  archbishop's 
numerous  progeny  is  told  by  another  of  Lord  Eldon's 
anecdotes,  in  which  he  relates  that  the  King,  speaking  to 
Sutton  of  his  large  family,  used  the  expression,  "  I 
believe  your  Grace  has  better  than  a  dozen.  "  No, 
sir,"  replied  the  archbishop,  "  only  eleven."  "  Well," 
replied  the  King,  "  is  not  that  better  than  a  dozen  ?  " 

Archbishop  Moore's  long  illness  ended  in  his  death  in 
January  1805.  Of  1805  it  is  sufficient  to  say  that  it  was 
the  year  of  Trafalgar,  which  was  fought  on  the  21st 


PRETYMAN 


38s 


October.  All  through  the  early  part  of  the  year  Napoleon 
was  collecting  his  armies  at  Boulogne  and  threatening 
the  invasion  of  England,  while  in  England  some  three 
hundred  thousand  volunteers  had  been  drilling  for  home 
defence.  Pitt,  the  saviour  of  England,  if  not  of  Europe, 
was  for  the  second  and  last  time  Prime  Minister.  He  had 
the  highest  opinion  of  Bishop  Pretyman,  who  had  been 
his  tutor  at  Cambridge.  Pretyman  was  a  first-rate 
mathematician,  and  a  high  wrangler.  From  his  Cam- 
bridge days  to  the  very  end  of  his  life,  Pitt  main- 
tained an  intimate  friendship  with  his  old  tutor.  They 
corresponded  by  letter  frequently.  On  his  ecclesiastical 
appointments  Pitt  consulted  Pretyman,  and  used  and 
valued  his  help  in  the  framing  of  the  Government's 
financial  measures.  He  had  been  made  Bishop  of  Lincoln 
by  Pitt  in  1787,  and  in  1803  had  taken  the  name  of 
Tomline  on  acquiring  valuable  estates  from  an  old  gentle- 
man whose  acquaintance  he  made  on  a  casual  visit  during 
an  episcopal  progress.  The  bishop's  tender  solicitude 
for  his  distinguished  pupil  extended  to  ministering  to 
him  on  his  death-bed .  As  was  stated  by  Bishop  Porteous 
in  the  letter  we  have  quoted,  many  thought  that  he  would 
be  Moore's  successor  in  the  Primacy.  There  is  no  doubt 
that  Pitt  wished  it.  There  is  equally  no  doubt  the  King 
wanted  the  Bishop  of  Norwich  to  be  advanced.  Before 
Moore's  death  we  find  Lord  Henley  on  the  7th  December 
1804  writing  out  to  Lord  Auckland  at  Calcutta:  "Lady 
H  .  .  .  gives  a  good  account  of  the  archbishop.  I 
understand  that  His  Majesty  is  desirous  should  he  die 
that  Sutton  should  succeed  him,  but  that  Mr.  Pitt  insists 
on  it  being  Lincoln,  and  that  the  question  has  been  in 
debate  between  them." 

According  to  a  letter  in  the  Croker  MSS  cited  by  Mr. 
Jesse  in  his  Memoirs  of  George  ///.,  the  actual  appoint- 
ment of  Sutton  to  Canterbury  was  made  as  follows  : 

The  King  received  a  message  from  Pitt  that  Arch- 
bishop Moore  was  dead,  and  that  he  would  wait  upon 
His  Majesty  next  morning.    The  King  suspecting  the 


386         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


cause,  ordered  his  horse  and  rode  over  to  Bishop  Sutton, 
then  residing  at  Windsor.  He  found  he  was  at  dinner 
with  some  friends,  and  sent  in  the  servant  to  say  a 
gentleman  wished  to  speak  to  him.  The  bishop  said 
immediately  he  could  not  go  ;  but  something  in  the 
servant's  manner  made  him  change  his  determination. 
When  he  came  out  he  found  the  King  standing  in  a  little 
dressing-room  near  the  hall  door.  The  King  took  him  by 
both  hands.  "  My  Lord  Archbishop  of  Canterbury," 
he  said,  "  I  wish  you  joy.  Not  a  word  ;  go  back  to  your 
guests."  On  Pitt's  arrival  the  next  day  the  King  said 
to  him  he  was  sure  he  would  be  glad  to  have  an  oppor- 
tunity of  providing  for  a  most  deserving  friend  and 
relative.  "  A  friend  indeed,"  replied  Pitt,  "  but  your 
Majesty  is  mistaken  as  to  there  being  any  relationship." 
The  King  not  minding  him  talked  on,  and  then  said,"  It 
is  such  a  good  thing  for  his  twelve  children."  This  was 
quite  too  much  for  the  Premier  ;  and  he  said,  "  Bishop 
Pretyman  I  am  certainly  most  anxious  to  promote  ; 
but  he  is  not  any  relation,  nor  has  he  such  a  family." 
"  Oho  !  oho  !  "  said  the  King,  "it  is  not  Pretyman 
whom  I  mean,  but  Sutton."  "  I  should  hope,"  said  Pitt, 
"  that  the  talents  and  literary  eminence  .  .  ."  "  It 
can't  be — it  can't  be  ;  I  have  already  wished  Sutton 
joy,  and  he  must  go  to  Canterbury."  Pitt,  it  seems, 
was  exceedingly  angry  at  having  been  over-reached  by 
the  King.  Lord  Sidmouth  told  Dean  Milman  that  he 
believed  such  strong  language  had  rarely  ever  passed 
between  a  Sovereign  and  his  Minister. 

There  is  another  account  in  a  royal  letter  from  Pitt, 
undated,  but  probably  written  in  December  1804  : 

"Mr.  Pitt  took  the  liberty  of  stating  to  yr  Majest}'-, 
when  he  had  last  the  honour  of  attending  yr  Majesty 
at  Windsor,  his  anxious  wish  with  a  view  to  the  ex- 
pected vacancy  of  the  archbishopric,  to  be  allowed  to 
recommend  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  as  the  fittest  person 
to  succeed  to  that  most  important  station.  As  there 
continues  to  be  great  reason  to  suppose  that  the  vacancy 


i828] 


PITT  OUT-WITTED 


387 


will  speedily  take  place,  he  requests  yr  Majesty's  in- 
dulgence shortly  to  state  the  grounds  on  which  that 
wish  is  founded.  In  doing  so  he  hopes  he  shall  not 
be  misunderstood  as  wishing  in  the  slightest  degree  to 
disparage  the  qualifications  of  the  Bishop  of  Norwich, 
for  whom  he  entertains  a  very  high  regard  and  a  sincere 
friendship  ;  and  whom  he  considers  to  be  highly  worthy 
of  any  mark  of  yr  Majesty's  favour  and  approbation." 

The  letter  then  goes  on  to  enumerate  Pretyman's 
merits  during  his  nearly  twenty  years'  tenure  of  the  See 
of  Lincoln,  and  also  dwells  on  the  close  and  uninterrupted 
friendship  which  has  subsisted  between  the  Bishop  of 
Lincoln  and  Pitt  himself  for  above  thirty  years.  In  the 
final  draft  of  the  letter  which  is  still  in  existence  the 
word  "  uninterrupted  "  is  substituted  for  "  intimate." 

Pretyman  was  Dean  of  St.  Paul's  as  well  as  Bishop 
of  Lincoln,  and  the  anxious  minister  closes  his  letter 
with  a  bait  to  his  royal  master  or  rather  to  his  friend. 
"  Should  your  Majesty,"  he  winds  up,  "  be  pleased  to 
accede  to  his  earnest  request,  the  Deanery  of  St.  Paul's 
(which  he  understands  to  be  now  worth  between  three 
and  four  thousand  pounds  per  annum)  would,  if  your 
Majesty  approves  of  it,  furnish  the  means  of  placing 
the  Bishop  of  Norwich  in  a  very  advantageous  situation." 

Perhaps  Pitt  did  not  realise  that  this  latter  course 
might  have  meant  the  monarch  losing  a  congenial  neigh- 
bour without  adequate  advantage  to  that  neighbour. 

However  true  or  untrue  Jesse's  story  may  be  in  its 
details,  George  iii.  undoubtedly  stuck  to  his  friend,  and 
Pitt  was  seriously  annoyed. 

He  writes  to  the  King  on  22nd  January  1805,  after 
Moore's  death,  a  letter  on  which  from  the  numerous 
corrections  and  alterations  in  the  draft  in  his  own 
handwriting  he  seems  to  have  bestowed  much  care  : 

"  Downing  Street, 

January  22,  1805. 
"  It  is  with  great  reluctance  that  Mr.  Pitt  at  any 
time  reverts  to  any  proposal  which  does  not  appear  to 


388         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


meet  your  Majesty's  wishes,  but  he  considers  it  on 
every  account  his  duty  not  to  disguise  from  yr  Majesty 
how  deeply  his  feehngs  are  wounded  and  his  hopes  of 
contributing  to  your  Majest3^'s  service  impaired  by 
your  Majesty's  apparent  disregard  of  his  recommenda- 
tion of  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  to  succeed  to  the  Arch- 
bishopric of  Canterbury.  He  entreats  yr  Majesty 
humbly  to  reflect  that  such  a  recommendation  appears 
uniformly  to  have  been  graciously  accepted  for  a  long 
course  of  time  in  every  instance  but  that  of  the  nomina- 
tion of  the  last  archbishop  which,  he  says,  took 
place  in  the  interval  between  the  resignation  of  one 
administration  and  the  appointment  of  another.  The 
King's  refusal  to  comply  with  his  request  can  hardly 
be  understood  by  himself,  and  will  certainly  not  be 
understood  by  the  public  in  any  other  light  than  as  a 
decisive  mark  of  your  Majesty's  not  honouring  him  with 
that  degree  of  confidence  which  his  predecessors  have 
enjoyed." 

The  letter  winds  up  : 

"Mr.  Pitt  still  flatters  himself  that  when  yr  Majesty 
is  fully  aware  of  these  considerations  it  cannot  be 
your  Majesty's  intention  to  reduce  him  to  so  mortify- 
ing a  condition.  The  sense  of  what  he  feels  due  to 
your  Majesty's  service  and  to  himself,  has  made  him 
anxious  to  submit  this  representation  previous  to  his 
having  the  honour  to  attend  your  Majesty  at  the 
Queen's  House  to-morrow." 

We  do  not  know  how  things  went  at  the  Queen's 
House  meeting  of  King  and  Minister,  but  George  iii. 
answered  Pitt's  letter  at  once.  Lord  Ashbourne  calls 
the  answer  "  polite  but  not  very  encouraging."  Per- 
haps his  mother's  advice  to  George  iii.  when  he  came 
to  the  throne,  "  Be  a  King,  George,  be  a  King,"  had 
sunk  deep. 

The  royal  letter  ran  : 

{Private.) 

"Windsor  Castle, /awwary  23,  1805. 
"  The  King  is  ever  hurt  when  he  cannot  bring 
himself  to  concur  with  Mr.  Pitt  in  any  matter  which 


1 828]  ADDINGTON  BOUGHT  389 

Mr.  Pitt  seems  to  have  at  heart  ;  this  he  feels  strongly 
on  the  present  occasion,  and  has  therefore  continued 
silent  on  the  vacancy  of  the  Archbishopric  of  Canter- 
bury ;  indeed,  it  is  but  this  morning  that  Lord  Auckland 
is  to  deliver  up  the  Seal  of  the  late  possessor,  therefore 
it  would  scarcely  have  been  proper  to  have  taken  any 
steps  towards  filling  up  the  vacancy  sooner.  The  King 
will  certainly  this  day  at  the  Queen's  House  hear  what- 
ever Mr.  Pitt  chooses  to  say  on  the  subject  ;  but  His 
Majesty  by  no  means  can  view  the  Archbishopric  in  the 
light  of  a  common  Bishopric.  It  is  the  person  on  the 
bench  on  whom  he  must  most  depend,  and  of  whose 
dignity  of  behaviour,  good  temper,  as  well  as  talents 
and  learning  he  feels  best  satisfied  ;  the  Archbishop  as 
well  as  the  King  are  for  life. 

"  George  R." 

This  letter  appears  to  have  been  sent  on  to  Prety- 
man,  for  it  is  in  an  envelope  addressed  "  Private.  To 
the  Bishop  of  Lincoln.    W.  Pitt." 

It  is  pleasant  to  learn  that  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln 
took  the  matter  quite  calmly.  He  was  blessed  with 
an  excellent,  clever,  and  devoted  wife,  and  it  appears, 
says  Lord  Ashbourne,  that  she  had  no  desire  for  the 
change. 

Soon  after  Manners  Sutton's  elevation  to  the  Primacy, 
matters  began  to  move  with  regard  to  the  acquisition  of 
a  new  country  palace  for  the  see,  in  substitution  for 
the  old  palace  at  Croydon.  The  site  at  Park  Hill  had 
not  turned  out  well ;  and  during  Moore's  archiepiscopate 
for  some  reason  or  other  the  matter  had  slumbered  ;  but 
soon  after  Sutton's  appointment  Addington  Manor,  about 
three  miles  from  Croydon,  was  suggested  as  a  suitable 
property  to  form  the  archiepiscopal  country  home. 
The  authorities  were  favourable.  In  1807  the  property 
was  purchased  from  William  Cole,  Esq.,  and  in  April 
1808,  the  Chancellor  gave  his  consent.  Addington 
Manor  lies  east-south-east  of  Croydon,  about  fourteen 
miles  from  London.  From  Croydon  it  forms  a  pleasant 
walk  for  a  Londoner.  Some  high  open  land  known 
as  Addington  Hills  is  passed  on  the  way.    The  property 


390 


CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


itself  has  a  mansion  house  built  by  Alderman  Trecothick 
in  1772,  and  about  1200  acres  of  land.  The  park  is 
undulating  and  pretty  :  there  are  fine  walled  kitchen 
and  fruit  gardens  sloping  to  the  west,  and  generally  the 
place  has  the  air  of  a  nobleman's  country-seat  of  a 
pleasant  and  attractive  kind.  Archbishop  Howley  was 
very  fond  of  it,  greatly  improved  the  park,  and  added 
chapel,  library,  and  other  rooms.  Readers  of  Arch- 
bishop Tait's  Life  will  remember  how  large  periods  in 
his  anxious  archiepiscopate  were  spent  there,  some  of 
these  times  when  the  archbishop  was  gravely  ill.  The 
place  remained  the  archbishops'  home  for  just  under  a 
century,  but  in  Archbishop  Benson's  time  the  question 
of  getting  rid  of  it  was  mooted.  The  desirability  of 
the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  having  some  house  in 
Canterbury,  more  central  for  the  diocese,  which  had 
largely  lost  its  purely  agricultural  character,  was  in- 
sisted on.  The  quiet,  shall  we  say  the  inaccessibility, 
which  may  well  have  constituted  a  charm  of  Addington 
in  Manners  Sutton's  or  Howley's  eyes,  was  not  at  all 
what  Archbishop  Temple  wanted.  He  took  up  the 
question  strongly,  refused  as  archbishop  to  pass  even  a 
single  night  there,^  and  in  July  1878  Addington  Manor 
was  sold.  In  the  beautiful  village  church  or  church- 
yard five  archbishops  —  Manners  Sutton,  Howley, 
Sumner,  Longley,  and  Tait — are  buried,  and  many 
members  of  their  families  and  households.  The 
burials  begin  in  the  church,  but  as  time  goes  on, 
get  farther  from  it — to  quiet  corners  of  the  church- 
yard. 

It  must  be  recorded — and  we  do  not  see  how  it  can 
be  recorded  without  shame — that  in  1810  the  arch- 
bishop and  six  other  prelates  voted  against  the  Bill 
promoted  by  Sir  Samuel  Romilly,  by  which  the  death 
penalty  ceased  to  be  exacted  for  the  offence  of  stealing 
privately  to  the  amount  of  five  shillings  in  a  dwelling- 
house,  and  assisted  in  the  rejection  by  the  Lords  of 

^  Life  of  Archbishop  Temple,  ii.  212. 


1828]      OPPOSES  ROMILLY'S  REFORMS  391 


such  Bill  which  the  Commons  had  passed.  The  great 
lawyer  and  philanthropist  says  :  "  I  rank  these  prelates 
amongst  the  members  who  were  solicited  to  vote 
against  the  Bill,  because  I  would  rather  be  convinced 
of  their  servility  to  Government  than  that,  rejecting  the 
mild  doctrines  of  their  religion,  they  could  have  come 
down  to  the  House  spontaneously  to  vote  that  trans- 
portation for  life  is  not  a  sufficiently  severe  punishment 
for  the  offence  of  pilfering  what  is  of  five  shilling  value, 
and  that  nothing  but  the  blood  of  the  offender  can 
afford  an  adequate  atonement  for  such  a  transgression." 
Lord  Ellenborough  was  a  strong  opponent  of  the 
change  ;  "  there  was  no  knowing  where  this  was  to 
stop."  Crime  was  common  at  this  time  :  Heath,  a 
good  judge,  had  ninety-nine  prisoners  just  about  now 
at  Maidstone,  of  whom  he  took  credit  to  himself  that 
he  only  left  four  to  be  hanged,  three  of  them  because 
they  could  bring  no  witnesses  to  character.  In 
reading  the  public  journals  of  one  hundred  and 
twenty  or  one  hundred  years  ago  nothing  startles  the 
reader  of  to-day  more  than  the  number  of  executions 
which  were  carried  out.  At  Newgate  or  Tyburn  from 
eight  to  twelve  times  a  year,  from  six  to  a  dozen  persons 
were  hanged — not  infrequently  including  women,  and 
the  wretches  were  kept  on  the  scaffold  in  the  public 
gaze  for  three-quarters  of  an  hour  or  more,  while  the 
Ordinary  of  Newgate  went  through  the  Devotions 
considered  appropriate.  Twenty-five  years  before, 
Burke,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  said  that  the 
number  of  convicts  sentenced  to  transportation  was 
estimated  at  not  less  than  one  hundred  thousand. 
Newgate  had  five  hundred  and  fifty-eight  prisoners. 
Since  1820  many  gaols  have  been  closed,  though  the 
population  has  so  largely  increased. 

On   Court   occasions   Sutton's   imposing  presence 
appeared  constantly.    He  married  the  Duke  of  Cumber- 
land in  1 81 5  ;  in  1816  the  Princess  Charlotte  of  Wales, 
and  the  Duke  and  Duchess  of  Gloucester  ;   in  181 8 
26 


392         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


the  Princess  Elizabeth,  the  Duke  of  Cambridge,  and 
the  Duke  of  Clarence. 

He  crowned  George  iv.  in  1821, 

He  was  a  constant  attendant  at  the  royal  funerals. 

In  Parliament,  Manners  Sutton  seems  to  have 
spoken  on  Church  matters,  and  matters  akin  thereto, 
but  rarely  if  ever  on  purely  political  questions.  His 
first  reported  intervention  in  debate  was  in  March 
1805  on  a  Bill  to  repeal  the  provision  of  the  Mortmain 
Act,  which  restrained  the  colleges  at  Oxford  and 
Cambridge  from  buying  advowsons.  The  main  argu- 
ment in  support  of  the  Bill  was  that  the  colleges 
had  not  enough  livings  to  provide  for  all  their  members 
who  were  kept  waiting  a  long  time  for  college  livings. 
The  main  argument  against  it  was  that  the  restraint 
was  the  legislative  child  of  a  very  mighty  man,  Lord 
Hardwicke,  and  ought  to  be  very  cautiously  interfered 
with.  The  well-being  of  the  parishioners  and  the 
claims  of  the  non-clerical  fellows  on  the  college  revenues 
do  not  seem  to  have  been  much  discussed.  The  arch- 
bishop on  the  motion  to  go  into  committee  supported 
the  Bill.  He  thought  the  colleges  would  be  better 
patrons  than  the  ordinary  purchaser  of  an  advowson, 
the  succession  to  livings  of  college  fellows  would  not 
be  too  rapid,  and  enough  patronage  would  still  be  left 
to  noble  members  of  their  Lordships'  House,  who 
dispensed  it  so  well.  It  is  of  interest  to  note  that 
the  Bishop  of  London,  Porteous,  complained  in  the 
course  of  the  debate  that  in  the  west  of  London  there 
were  chapels  of  ease,  but  few  parish  churches.  The 
Bill  was  passed. 

In  the  same  year,  the  Roman  Catholic  petition 
from  Ireland  was  presented  by  Lord  Granville.  Sutton 
spoke  against  the  relief  prayed  for  by  the  petitioners. 
He  considered  the  petition  the  natural  sequel  of  the 
numerous  statutes  in  relief  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
disabilities  passed  during  George  iii.'s  reign.  "  It  was 
for  their  lordships  to  determine  in  their  character  as 


1828]        ROMAN  CATHOLIC  RELIEF  393 


statesmen  and  legislators  to  what  extent  these  con- 
cessions could  with  safety  be  carried.  The  substance 
of  the  petition  was  compressed  into  one  sentence, 
an  equal  participation  on  equal  terms  of  the  full 
benefits  of  the  British  Laws  and  Constitution.  It 
was  no  less  than  a  request  on  the  part  of  the  Roman 
Catholics  to  legislate  for  a  Protestant  country.  He 
was  as  attached  to  genuine  toleration  as  any  of  their 
lordships.  To  destroy  the  fences  which  the  wisdom 
and  experience  of  their  ancestors  had  erected  round 
the  Established  Church  was  to  do  all  in  their  power 
to  excite  that  bad  spirit  of  animosity  and  religious 
intolerance  that  disgraced  the  worst  pages  of  history 
since  the  Reformation.  He  accordingly  opposed  the 
petition."  The  motion  to  proceed  with  the  petition 
was  lost  in  the  Lords  by  178  to  49. 

In  the  Commons  Fox  introduced  the  petition,  but 
it  was  lost  by  336  to  124. 

On  the  Bill  to  improve  the  position  of  stipendiary 
curates — in  the  course  of  the  debate  on  which  the  Earl 
of  Suffolk  mentioned  a  case  in  the  county  of  Lincoln 
when  the  duty  of  twenty  parishes  was  in  general 
performed  by  three  curates — the  Primate  does  not 
seem  to  have  spoken  ;  but  though  passed  by  the  Lords, 
it  was  thrown  out  by  the  Commons. 

The  following  year  the  archbishop  interposed  in 
the  House  of  Lords  on  a  matter  not  wholly  without 
interest  even  now.  Apparently  the  Custom  House 
retained  a  number  of  holidays  or  ecclesiastical  festivals  ; 
on  days  when  business  was  in  full  swing  elsewhere, 
as  Lord  Grenville  pointed  out,  the  merchant  found 
to  his  inconvenience  the  doors  of  the  Custom  House 
shut.  The  archbishop,  like  a  good  Churchman,  though 
deprecating  the  excessive  number  of  holidays  of  Pre- 
reformation  times,  thought  three  or  four,  but  at  any 
rate  two,  more  holidays  particularly  commemorative  of 
the  history  of  our  Saviour  might  be  retained,  and  moved 
an  amendment  supporting  a  holiday  on  the  Epiphany. 


3t4 


CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


The  Bishop  of  St.  Asaph  claimed  four — The  Epiphany, 
The  Annunciation,  The  Ascension,  and  St.  John  the 
Baptist's  Day.  But  the  archbishop's  amendment  was 
lost. 

In  1808  the  Bishop  of  London,  Bishop  Porteous, 
made  another  effort  in  the  House  of  Lords  with  a  view 
of  improving  the  position  of  curates  where  the  rector 
or  vicar  was  non-resident.  An  Act  of  1796  had  allowed 
to  the  curate  of  a  non-resident  rector  his  house  and 
£7S  3.  year.  But  where  the  living  was  well  endowed  this 
was  thought  too  much  for  the  idle  rector  and  not 
enough  for  the  curate.  The  main  object  of  the  Bill, 
as  expressed  by  Porteous,  was  to  "  take  from  those 
who  did  nothing  a  reasonable  allowance  for  the  curate 
who  performed  the  whole  of  the  service,  for  which  the 
living  itself  was  at  first  granted."  The  Bill  proposed 
that  where  the  living  amounted  to  £400  or  upwards,  one- 
fifth  of  it  should  be  allowed  to  the  curate  until  he 
received  £2 so.  Sutton  supported  the  principle  of  the 
Bill,andgot  it  a  second  reading,  though  it  was  denounced 
as  a  violation  of  private  property,  a  hardship  on  a  man 
who  had  bought  a  living  on  the  faith  he  should  receive 
the  full  revenue  of  it,  a  weakening  of  the  incitements 
to  a  young  curate  to  work  hard  and  rise  in  his  pro- 
fession. On  the  third  reading  Porteous  failed  to  get  the 
support  not  only  of  the  mighty  John  on  the  Woolsack 
— this  might  have  been  expected— but  also  of  several  of 
his  brother  bishops  ;  Sutton  deserted  him — weakly  saying 
that  though  he  was  satisfied  with  the  principle  of  the 
Bill,  he  thought  some  clauses  might  produce  vexation — 
apparently  to  the  non-resident  rector  ! — and  voted  for 
the  rejection  of  the  Bill,  which  was  rejected  without  a 
division. 

Sutton's  next  parliamentary  effort  seems  to  have 
done  him  credit.  Once  or  twice  the  question  of  the 
remarriage  of  persons  divorced  by  Act  of  Parliament 
had  come  before  the  Lords,  and  they  had  indeed  passed 
Bills  forbidding  the  marriage  of  a  woman  whose  marriage 


i828]    REMARRIAGE  OF  THE  DIVORCED  395 


had  been  dissolved  for  her  misconduct  with  the  partner 
of  her  guilt.  But  the  Commons  liad  thrown  them  out. 
Lord  Auckland  proposed  a  new  standing  order  that 
every  Divorce  Bill  should  forbid  the  person  whose 
marriage  with  the  petitioner  should  be  dissolved  thereby 
to  intermarry  with  the  offending  party  on  account  of 
whose  adultery  with  such  person  the  marriage  was  so 
dissolved.  Sutton  supported  the  motion  in  what  the 
report  calls  a  very  argumentative  and  eloquent  speech, 
quoting  Holy  Writ  in  Greek  and  English,  and  dealing  in  an 
exhaustive  manner  with  the  whole  question  of  marriage 
and  divorce,  though  the  reporter  had  to  confess  that 
he  "  made  a  variety  of  remarks  and  used  many  argu- 
ments with  which  we  are  unable  to  deal."  The  order 
was  carried.  Some  years  afterwards  on  the  considera- 
tion of  a  particular  Divorce  Bill,  the  archbishop  on 
the  highest  grounds  opposed  the  omission  of  the  clause 
prohibiting  the  guilty  parties  from  remarrying. 

A  year  or  two  later  Manners  Sutton  had  to  deal  with 
the  question  of  the  licences  granted  under  the  Toleration 
Act  of  William  and  Mary,  and  the  Amending  Act  of 
19  Geo.  III.  c.  44,  to  Dissenting  Ministers  and  Preachers. 
The  matter  was  taken  up  by  Lord  Sidmouth,  who, 
before  his  elevation  to  the  peerage,  had  been  Henry 
Addington  and  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons.  He 
was  a  man  of  honesty,  industry,  and  good  intelligence, 
though  probably  not  gifted  with  the  highest  order  of 
statesmanship.  The  Amending  Act  provided  that  every 
Dissenter  making  a  declaration  against  Popery  and 
declaring  himself  to  be  a  Christian  and  a  Protestant, 
on  paying  sixpence  for  his  certificate  was  entitled  to  all 
the  privileges  granted  by  the  Act  of  William  and  Mary 
to  Dissenting  Ministers,  and  was  exempted  from  service 
in  the  Militia  and  in  all  parochial  offices.  Under  this 
Act  licences  to  preach  were  obtained  at  quarter  sessions 
by  persons  of  no  education,  by  persons  not  of  full  age, 
and  as  to  whose  moral  qualifications  for  the  ofBce  of 
preacher  or  teacher  little  or  nothing  was  known.    As  a 


396         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


proof  of  the  want  of  education  of  applicants,  and 
particularly  of  their  bad  spelling,  a  return  was  published 
of  eighteen  different  ways  in  which  the  words  "  dis- 
senting minister," "  teacher,""  preacher," and "  gospel  " 
had  been  misspelt  by  the  applicants  in  the  case  of  two 
hundred  and  eighty-five  licences  taken  out  at  Middlesex 
Sessions  : 

Preacher  of  the  Gopel, 

Preacher  of  the  Gosple, 

Precher  of  the  Gospel, 

Precher  of  the  Gospell, 

Pracher  of  the  Gospell, 

Preach  of  the  Gospell, 

Precher  of  the  Gosple, 

Precher  of  Gospell, 

Miniaster  of  the  Gospel, 

Preacher  of  the  Ghosper, 

Preacher  of  teacher  the  Gospel  Bappist, 

Preecher  of  the  Gospel, 

Teacher  of  the  Geouspel  of  Jesus  Christ, 

A  discenting  teacher, 

Disenting  teacher, 

Decenting  teacher, 

Prashr  of  the  Gospell, 

Preicher  of  the  Gospel. 

A  case  was  brought  forward  of  an  applicant  for  a 
licence  who  admitted  he  could  neither  read  nor  write, 
and  being  asked  by  the  magistrate  whether  it  was  not 
strange  to  take  the  important  office  of  a  teacher  when 
he  was  not  able  to  peruse  the  Bible,  said,  "  If  you  don't 
know  what  inspiration  is,  I  do,  for  I  have  felt  it." 

Sidmouth  proposed  certain  certificates  of  fitness 
from  householders  and  others  as  to  the  respectability 
of  candidates  for  licences  and  as  to  their  fitness  for 
being  preachers  or  teachers.  He  had  been  told  by 
many  Dissenters  that  the  evils  then  existing  required 
amendment,  and  in  1809  the  House  of  Lords  without 


JOSHUA  WATSON 


397 


opposition  granted  Returns  of  the  Licences  granted 
since  1 760  as  supplying  information  on  which  a  Bill 
could  be  framed.  Sutton  on  this  occasion  supported 
him.  But  when  in  181 1  he  brought  in  his  Bill,  the 
Dissenters  had — wrongly  as  it  appears — got  the  idea 
that  he  threatened  their  liberties  under  the  Toleration 
Acts.  About  seven  hundred  petitions  from  Dissenters 
were  presented  against  it :  Whigs  like  Lord  Holland, 
Lord  Erskine,  and  Lord  Grey  spoke  against  it.  There 
was  nothing  to  make  the  Tory  Churchmen  support  it, 
and  it  was  negatived  without  a  division.  This  course 
Sutton,  posing  as  having  kindly  feelings  for  the  Dis- 
senters, recommended  as  being  their  wish.  Sidmouth 
unquestionably  was  hardly  treated  in  the  matter. 

In  Church  matters  generally  Sutton  was  the  friend 
of  the  men  who  represented  the  best  part  of  the  religious 
laity  of  the  day — men  like  Joshua  Watson.  Watson 
may  indeed  be  said  to  have  been  for  the  first  quarter 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  or  a  great  part  of  it,  the 
lay  archbishop  —  chief  guardian  and  overseer  —  of  the 
English  Church. 

The  central  decade  of  Sutton's  primacy,  from,  say, 
1 810  to  1820,  saw  remarkable  movement  in  three  im- 
portant branches  of  Church  work  :  religious  education, 
foreign  missions,  and  church  building.  Each  movement 
was  connected  with  a  great  Church  society  :  of  each 
Watson  was,  if  not  the  originator,  a  very  leading 
promoter. 

Englishmen  are  suspicious,  perhaps  unduly  sus- 
picious, of  clerically  minded  laymen.  But  Watson  was 
indeed  a  man  of  the  most  genuine  piety  and  of  very 
sound  abilities.  In  truth,  for  many  years  he  was — 
and  no  one  would  have  acknowledged  it  more  than  the 
archbishop — Manners  Sutton's  right  hand.  The  son 
of  a  wine  merchant  on  Tower  Hill,  he  became  at  twenty- 
one  his  father's  partner,  and  in  due  course  was  estab- 
lished as  a  partner  in  a  house  of  the  same  kind  in  Mark 
Lane.    Here,  chiefly  by  executing  Government  con- 


398         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


tracts,  he  made  a  good  fortune.  But  Joshua  Watson's 
heart  was  in  rehgious  and  philanthropic  work,  and  that 
work  he  thought  could  best  be  done — perhaps  could 
only  be  rightly  done — by  the  Church  established  in 
this  country.  Though  he  had  made  a  fortune  out  of 
it,  he  did  not  like  business  or  its  ways.  His  views 
thereon,  expressed  in  a  letter  he  wrote  several  years 
after  his  retirement  to  a  young  man  who  had  been  in 
his  employ,  after  saying  that  many  a  thing  which 
perhaps  the  custom  of  trade  never  allowed  one  to 
scruple  about,  or  which  the  arts  of  competition  in  a 
market  seemed  to  make  a  necessary  part  of  self-defence, 
might  after  retirement  possibly  appear  in  more  question- 
able colours,  he  says  :  "  In  my  own  case  I  rejoiced  when 
the  snare  was  broken  ;  and  I  can  truly  add  that  the  wish 
to  make  my  escape,  and  to  be  secure  against  the  risk 
of  being  again  entangled  therein  and  overcome,  pre- 
vailed much  in  my  early  retirement  from  the  profits 
of  Mark  Lane."  ^ 

Noscitur  a  sociis.  They  were  a  goodly  band  :  "  the 
Hackney  phalanx,"  keen  Churchmen,  lavish  of  their 
wealth  and  of  their  time  and  energy  for  charity,  and 
very  capable  men  withal.  Watson's  brother  was 
rector  of  Hackney,  and  he  himself  took  a  house  there ; 
James  Allan  Park,  one  of  the  best  of  judges — who  that 
knows  his  statue  in  the  vestibule  of  Lincoln's  Inn  can 
doubt  his  power;  Richardson,  another  judge — linked 
with  our  own  day  by  his  daughter  being  the  wife  of 
the  great  Bishop  Selwyn ;  Stevens,  the  founder  of 
"  Nobody's  Friends  "  ;  and  of  clerics,  Henry  Handley 
Norris  and  William  Van  Mildert. 

Watson  retired  from  business  in  1814  at  the  age  of 
forty-three  :  but  he  had  learnt  businesslike  methods 
and  how  to  keep  accounts.  Sir  George  Rose — long  at 
the  Treasury — said  of  his  accounts  of  the  fund  for 
relief  of  the  distressed  Germans  that  they  were  the 
most  clear  and  exact  he  had  ever  seen. 

*  Churton,  Life  of  Watson,  145. 


EDUCATION 


399 


In  1811  Manners  Sutton  was  concerned  with  the 
educational  efforts  on  the  part  of  Churchmen  which 
resulted  in  the  formation  of  the  National  Society. 
The  eighteenth  century  saw  the  foundation  of  a  certain 
number  of  charity  schools — some  of  which  not  only 
taught,  but  housed  and  fed  their  children.  But  these 
were  the  work  of  a  few  persons  of  exceptional 
charity  and  enlightenfnent.  The  ordinary  citizen — 
none  the  less  that  he  called  himself  a  member  of  the 
Church  of  England — was  satisfied  that  in  a  few  country 
villages  there  was  a  dame  school,  and  save  that,  that 
there  should  be  no  general  education  at  all.  Hannah 
More  was  prosecuted  in  the  Ecclesiastical  Court  for 
instituting  a  village  school  at  Wedmore.^  A  bishop 
preaching  at  St.  Paul's  in  1810  said  that  nearly  two- 
thirds  of  the  children  of  their  labouring  poor  in  this 
kingdom  had  little  or  no  education 

The  attention  of  Churchmen  seems  to  have  been 
particularly  called  to  the  question  by  improvements  in 
the  method  of  education  which  in  the  first  decade  of 
the  nineteenth  century  were  brought  before  the  public. 

About  1790  a  certain  Dr.  Andrew  Bell  had  been 
employed  as  one  of  the  East  India  Company's  chaplains, 
and  he  had  noticed  that  the  Hindoos  in  their  schools 
saved  an  enormous  amount  of  time  and  labour  by 
teaching  their  children  not  only,  or  chiefly,  one  by  one, 
but  in  classes,  and  by  employing  some  of  the  children 
as  monitors  to  instruct  their  fellows.  A  class  meant 
that  there  was  a  top  of  the  class  and  there  was  a  rivalry 
to  get  there  :  the  correction  of  one  child's  fault  was 
the  instruction  on  that  point  of  the  whole  class.'  Bell 
introduced  a  system  based  on  these  principles  into  the 
male  military  orphan  school  at  Madras.  It  worked 
well  and  the  Indian  authorities  approved  it.  Bell 
returned  to  England  in  1797  and  published  his  educa- 
tional efforts  and  their  results.  Joseph  Lancaster, 
a  remarkable  man,  either  got  hold  of  Bell's  ideas  or 

*  Hore,  ii.  219.       *  Perry,  Church  History,  iii.  165.       ^  Perry,  iii.  165. 


CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


about  the  same  time  evolved  ideas  similar  to  Bell's 
from  his  own  consciousness.  There  was  a  contest  for 
some  years  as  to  who  was  the  original  inventor.  The 
better  opinion  gives  these  honours  to  Bell.^  Lancaster's 
mother,  a  Baptist,  kept  a  small  shop  at  Bristol.  The 
boy  was  wayward  and  ran  away  to  sea  :  but  Elizabeth 
Fry  and  some  of  her  relations  got  hold  of  him,  and 
finding  in  him  an  aptitude  for  teaching,  started  him 
with  a  school  for  thirty  boys.  This  he  carried  on  with 
his  proper  trade  of  a  shoemaker.  His  principles  of 
teaching  by  classes  and  monitors  grew  upon  him  :  he 
began  to  lecture  on  them.  In  1807  the  British  and 
Foreign  School  Society  was  founded  to  give  effect  to 
Lancaster's  ideas. 

With  his  Nonconformist  parentage  and  Quaker 
associations,  it  is  not  surprising  that  he  called  himself 
a  Quaker  and  advocated  a  national  system  of  unde- 
nominational education,  in  which  methods  like  Bell's 
should  be  followed.  Even  the  Church  Catechism  he 
shut  the  doors  of  his  school  against.  Leading  Church- 
men Hke  Watson,  Norris,  and  Bowles  were  roused. 
They  appreciated  two  things — how  slack  the  Church 
had  become  in  education,  and  the  value  of  the  new 
methods  of  teaching.  A  wise  Churchman,  Davis,  had 
established  a  "Bell"  school  at  Leytonstone.  Norris 
paid  it  a  visit  and  told  his  friends  what  he  saw. 
Marsh — then  Lady  Margaret's  Professor  at  Cambridge, 
afterwards  Bishop  of  Peterborough — joined  the  bene- 
volent caucus  and  did  much  to  rouse  public  opinion 
by  a  sermon  preached  at  St.  Paul's  before  the  Society 
•of  Patrons  of  Charity  Schools  on  13th  June  181 1.  In 
this  he  pleaded  earnestly  for  the  setting  on  foot  of 
national  schools  in  which  Church  teaching  should  have 
a  place.  The  S.P.C.K.  printed  and  widely  circulated 
this  discourse. 

At  a  meeting  at  Watson's  the  formation  of  such  a 
Society  as  the  National  Society  had  been  resolved  on. 

'  Churton,  Lije  of  Watson,  io8. 


i 


1 828]  THE  NATIONAL  SOCIETY  401 


Manners  Sutton  was  appealed  to.  He  gave  his  approval 
and  declared  his  readiness  to  attend  the  first  meeting 
of  the  Society.  Of  more,  or  perhaps  less,  importance,  the 
countenance  of  the  first  gentleman  in  Europe,  the  Prince 
Regent,  was  obtained  for  the  new  Society,  though  in  pro- 
mising his  support  the  Prince,  according  to  a  letter  from 
Bowles  to  Watson,  "  speaking  of  the  Church,  called  it  an 
establishment  interwoven  with  the  constitution  of  the 
country."    But  an  indifferent  Churchmanship  this  ! 

By  the  end  of  September  matters  were  ripe  for  a 
meeting  of  the  Primate  and  the  bishops  in  or  near  London 
with  Watson,  Norris,  and  their  friends  to  arrange  the 
details  for  launching  the  new  Society  on  the  world. 
Watson  had  drafted  a  prospectus .  On  8th  October  Judge 
Allan  Park  writes  to  him  : 

"  I  would  give  the  world  to  see  you.  I  shall  go 
to  Bartlett's  Buildings  (the  office  of  the  S.P.C.K.)  at 
12  on  the  chance  of  seeing  you.  ...  I  have  just  had  a 
second  letter  from  the  Duke  of  Gloucester  desiring  that 
he  may  be  one  of  the  first  subscribers,  leaving  it  to  me 
to  decide  whether  fifty  or  a  hundred  guineas." 

On  1 3th  October  Marsh  writes  from  Cambridge  : 

"  As  we  shall  have  many  propositions  to  arrange  and 
discuss  preparatory  to  the  meeting,  I  propose  that  we 
should  dine  together  in  a  private  room  of  some  coffee- 
house near  the  Royal  Exchange  about  half-past  five  on 
Tuesday.  ...  In  this  interior  cabinet  we  can  arrange 
the  propositions  which  are  to  be  brought  forward  at  the 
Cabinet  Council." 

A  day  or  two  before  Mr.  Justice  Richardson  had 
written  rejoicing  that  the  archbishop  is  disposed  to  take 
the  lead  and  act  the  part  that  belongs  to  him. 

The  meeting  so  much  prepared  for  was  held  on 
Wednesday,  i6th  October  1811.  Manners  Sutton  took 
the  chair,  and  the  formation  of  the  Society  was  resolved 
on.  On  Monday,  21st  October,  he  again  presided  over  a 
general  meeting  of  the  Society  at  Bow  Church.  Rules 


402 


CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


were  passed,  and  at  the  request  of  the  meeting  the  arch- 
bishop undertook  to  ask  the  Prince  Regent,  who  had 
promised  general  support,  to  be  Patron  of  the  Society. 
A  circular  letter  signed  "  C.  Cantuar  "  was  issued 
giving  particulars  of  the  formation  of  the  Society,  and 
inviting  suitable  persons  to  join  the  committee.  The 
Bar,  prone  to  good  works,  was  represented  in  the  new 
Society  by  its  auditors,  Richards,  afterwards  Chief  Baron, 
and  Plumer,  Master  of  the  Rolls,  and  by  Sir  Vicary  Gibbs, 
A.-G.  Manners  Sutton  nominated  Joshua  Watson  as 
the  Society's  first  treasurer. 

From  the  first,  teaching  teachers  how  to  teach  was  a 
prominent  part  of  the  Society's  work.  In  May  181 2 
premises  were  bought  in  Baldwin's  Gardens,  Holborn, 
and  a  central  school  fitted  for  six  hundred  boys  and  four 
hundred  girls  established.  Admiral  Lord  Exmouth  got 
a  teacher  from  the  Society  for  his  flagship,  and  each 
battalion  in  the  army  had  a  sergeant  as  schoolmaster 
trained  to  teach  according  to  the  new  system.^ 

The  work  of  the  National  Society  increased  apace, 
and  when  in  1833  the  Government  for  the  first  time  made 
a  grant — a  small  one— to  the  cause  of  education,  it  was 
found  that  the  National  Society  had  caused  six  hundred 
and  ninety  schools  to  be  erected,  the  British  and  Foreign 
Society,  the  successors  of  Lancaster's  society,  a  very 
much  smaller  number. 

In  the  following  year,  181 2,  Sutton  was  concerned 
with  the  proposals  of  the  Government  in  aid  of  the 
Dissenters.  Lord  Liverpool,  the  Prime  Minister,  intro- 
duced a  Bill  relieving  Dissenters  from  the  annoying  and 
vexatious  provisions  of  the  Five  Mile  Act  and  the  Con- 
venticle Act,  and  also  giving  some  relief  in  respect  of  the 
Toleration  Act.^  The  archbishop  was,  of  course,  con- 
sulted by  the  Premier  before  the  Bill  was  brought  in,  and 
his  general  consent  obtained.  Sutton  wanted  to  make 
one  or  two  of  the  clauses  more  stringent,  but  Lord 
Liverpool  declined.  One  of  the  archbishop's  sugges- 
^  Churton,  ii8.  *  Life  of  Lord  Sidmouth,  iii.  112. 


1 828]  NON-RESIDENT  CLERGY  403 

tions  is  interesting  :  he  wanted  to  make  the  Bill  apply 
in  terms  to  "  Dissenters."  In  reply  Lord  Liverpool 
wrote  that  the  proposal  would  exclude  the  great  body  of 
Methodists  from  the  benefits  of  the  Bill,  that  a  large 
proportion  of  these  men  professed  to  be  members  of  the 
Church,  attended  its  services,  but  claimed  the  privilege 
of  meeting  and  associating  for  religious  purposes  in 
other  places,  and  at  other  times,  and  pressed  against  any 
measure  which,  at  any  time,  and  more  particularly  under 
the  then  existing  circumstances,  would  drive  them  to 
become  professed  Dissenters  from  the  Church  of  England. 
The  Act  passed  on  29th  July  1812.^ 

In  1 81 3  the  archbishop  spoke  on  a  Bill  making  pro- 
vision for  the  curates  of  small  livings  with  a  non-resident 
rector.  Strangely  enough  Sutton  opposed  the  Bill,  but 
unsuccessfully.  One  speaker  said  :  "  Curates  discharg- 
ing the  duties  of  four  parishes  and  galloping  about  from 
church  to  church  was  what  brought  the  Church  into  con- 
tempt." 2 

In  1 814  we  find  the  archbishop  promoting  a  measure 
to  relieve  the  clergy  who,  by  inadvertence,  had  incurred 
penalties  for  non-residence.  He  professed  to  help  two 
classes  of  clergy  :  (i)  those  who  having  two  livings  had 
omitted  to  notify  the  bishop  of  their  non-residence  on 
one  of  them  ;  (2)  those  who  having  had  a  licence  for 
non-residence  had  omitted  to  renew  it.  Perhaps  now- 
adays we  should  think  archiepiscopal  activity  in  legis- 
lation might  be  better  employed  ;  but  Lord  Eldon  told 
a  curious  story  to  the  House  in  the  course  of  the  debate 
of  a  clergyman  who  went  down  to  his  living  in  the 
country  and  found  a  handsome  parsonage  house  much 
larger  than  he  wanted,  as  he  had  no  family.  An  attorney 
in  the  place  with  a  large  family  was  living  in  a  small 
convenient  house  which  he  proposed  to  exchange  with 
the  clergyman  and  reside  at  his  parsonage.  At  the  end 
of  twelve  months,  when  the  attorney  was  applied  to  for 

*  Yonge,  Life  of  Lord  Liverpool,  i.  433. 
'  Parliamentary  Debates,  xxxi.  299. 


404         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


the  difference  of  the  rent,  his  answer  was  :  "  I  owe  you 
nothing,  but  you  owe  me  £110,  the  penalty  for  non- 
residence,"  which  he  actually  sued  for  and  recovered  !^ 

The  year  18 14  saw  the  consecration  by  Archbishop 
Manners  Sutton  of  Dr.  Middleton  as  the  first  Bishop  of 
Calcutta.  He  was  a  distinguished  man,  of  great  piety 
and  excellent  scholarship.  The  latter  he  had  shown 
by  a  memorable  work  on  The  Doctrines  of  the  Greek 
Article  ;  the  former  by  a  very  zealous  career  as  a  London 
clergyman,  being  Rector  of  St.  Pancras.  For  the 
establishment  of  such  a  bishopric,  Joshua  Watson  and 
kindred  spirits  had  for  some  years  laboured.  The  pre- 
cedent of  the  bishops  in  America  was  cited  in  its  favour. 

He  was  consecrated  by  Manners  Sutton  on  the 
8th  May  1 814.  Mr.  Hore,  in  his  History  of  the  Church  of 
England,  says  that,  in  proposing  the  health  of  the  newly 
appointed  bishop,  the  archbishop  wound  up  with  the 
following  paternal  advice  :  "  Remember,  my  Lord 
Bishop,  that  your  Primate  on  the  day  of  your  conse- 
cration defined  your  duty  for  you,  that  duty  is  to  put 
down  enthusiasm  and  to  preach  the  Gospel."  ^  1 814,  the 
year  of  his  retirement  from  business,  saw  Watson's 
election  to  be  treasurer  of  the  S.P.C.K.  There  was, 
as  Archdeacon  Cambridge,  a  prominent  divine,  said, 
"  a  universal  request  of  archbishops,  bishops,  priests, 
and  deacons  "  to  him  to  accept  the  office.  Manners 
Sutton  presided  over  a  very  full  meeting  of  the  Society 
held  at  its  then  offices  in  Bartlett's  Buildings,  Holborn, 
when  the  election  took  place,  and  supported  it  in  a 
speech  of  —  as  Watson's  biographer  expresses  it-^^ 
"  dignity  and  grace."  He  spoke  of  Watson's  "  talents 
and  unwearied  zeal  for  whatever  was  most  dear  and 
valuable,"  and  from  no  one  could  praise  of  Watson 
more  fittingly  come  than  from  the  Primate  who  was  so 
often,  and  so  long,  indebted  to  him  for  help  and  advice. 

The  establishment  of  Bishop  Middleton  at  Calcutta 
and  the  appointment  of  Watson  as  treasurer  of  the 
*  Parliamentary  Debates,  xxvii.  866.  *  ii.  239. 


i828]  INDIAN  MISSIONS  405 

S.P.C.K.  were  the  occasions  of  the  Church  taking  up  a 
new  position  as  regards  missionary  work  in  India.  And 
in  these  steps  Manners  Sutton  took  a  leading,  if  a  cautious, 
part.  The  eighteenth  century  saw  practically  the  only 
mission  in  India,  that  which  had  been  founded  by 
the  Danish  Missionary,  Bartholomew  Zeigenbalq,  at 
Tranquebar.  The  Dutch  East  India  Company  had, 
before  1700,  a  missionary  college  in  Ceylon  ;  but  when 
Zeigenbalq  started  his  work  in  1706  he,  from  the  first, 
got  liberal  support  from  England.  England  and  Den- 
mark were  on  good  terms.  Queen  Anne's  husband 
was  a  Dane  :  Wake  presented  Zeigenbalq  at  the  English 
Court  in  1 716,  and  students  of  Archbishop  Wake's  life 
know  how  voluminous  are  the  communications  between 
him  and  the  Tranquebar  missionaries.  Later  on  there 
was  no  doubt  an  ecclesiastical  department  of  the  Board 
of  Control ;  but  till  the  middle  or  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century  the  East  India  Company  was  limited  in  its 
domains.  Since  1701  there  had  been  the  S.P.G.,  but, 
as  Churton  says,  it  was  "  rather  a  board  for  furnishing 
aid  and  administration  to  the  funds  which  the  Govern- 
ment supplied  to  the  clergy  in  the  North  American 
Colonies  than  a  Missionary  Society  for  the  Church  at 
large."  Its  annual  voluntary  subscriptions  and  dona- 
tions were  less  than  ;^iooo.  So  what  England  gave 
over  a  period  of  half  a  century  to  the  poor  Dutch  mis- 
sionaries at  Tranquebar  came  to  be  held  by  the  S.P.C.K. 
Its  new  treasurer  thought  that  now  there  was  a  bishop 
of  Calcutta,  the  missionary  funds  should  be  held  by 
the  missionary  soi:iety.  Wordsworth,  Rector  of  Lam- 
beth, afterwards  Master  of  Trinity  College,  Cambridge, 
father  of  a  great  English  bishop  and  grandfather  of 
another,  agreed  with  him  and  thought  it  was  a  good 
time  to  arouse  interest  in  the  missionary  cause  among 
English  Churchmen.  He  even  hoped  to  consolidate 
the  S.P.G.  and  the  C.M.S.  Watson  and  Wordsworth 
went  to  Manners  Sutton,  who  was  favourable  to  their 
ideas,  which  included  a  royal  letter  for  a  general  col- 


4o6  CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


lection  in  parish  churches.  "  Draw  up  a  memorial," 
said  the  archbishop,  "  and  I  will  present  it  to  the 
Prime  Minister."^  So  a  letter  and  a  memorial  to  the 
archbishop  were  prepared.  An  East  India  director 
approved  the  drafts.  The  letter  hoped  that  Middleton's 
"  sound  discretion  "  would  overcome  any  jealousies 
that  the  new  establishment  had  aroused  (some  of  the 
chaplains  had,  in  fact,  preferred  a  Governor-General's 
to  episcopal  control),  and  suggested  a  college  for  training 
native  clergymen,  but  especially  asked  for  the  transfer 
to  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  of 
the  missionary  department  of  the  S.P.C.K.  "  Then, 
my  lord,"  the  memorial  wound  up,  "  the  Church  of 
England,  strong  in  her  three  chartered  and  ancient 
societies,  each  with  undivided  energy  pursuing  its  own 
single  and  simple  object  and  having  a  common  centre 
of  union  in  your  Grace's  presidency,  might  in  her  Educa- 
tion Society,  her  Bible  and  Religious  Tract  Society,  and 
her  Missionary  Society  boldly  offer  to  her  members  all 
that  the  most  zealous  of  her  communion  need  desire  in 
the  great  concern  of  religious  and  moral  instruction  at 
home  and  abroad." 

The  memorial  was  more  specific  :  it  extolled  the 
Dutch  Tranquebar  mission  ;  twice  Middleton's  liberality 
had  saved  it  from  ruin  ;  the  Christians  in  Ceylon  had 
recently  been  placed  under  an  archdeacon  at  the  re- 
quest of  the  Governor  ;  they  numbered  600,000  or 
700,000  ;  money  was  needed.  If  Manners  Sutton 
favoured  the  application,  "  a  small  Parliamentary 
bounty  "  as  in  British  North  America  might  be  given  ; 
or  if  even  this  were  too  much,  a  general  appeal  "  from 
all  the  pulpits  in  the  country "  might  have  good 
results. 

By  a  resolution  passed  at  a  full  meeting,  the  S.P.C.K. 
handed  over  its  India  Fund  to  the  S.P.G.  The  arch- 
bishop got  the  S.P.G.  to  vote  the  new  Bishop  of  Cal- 
cutta £5000  to  help  his  work.    Lord  Liverpool  did 

'Churton,  173. 


Charm:s  Manners  Sutton 


[  To  face  />.  406 


1828]  CHARITY  TO  DEVASTATED  EUROPE  407 


what  Manners  Sutton  asked  him  ;  and  the  archbishop 
was  able  to  announce  the  first  of  the  royal  letters  to 
be  issued  by  the  Prince  Regent  authorising  collections 
in  all  churches  for  the  S.P.G.  This  produced  ^^50,000, 
and  as  a  result  of  the  effort  the  good  Middleton  was 
able  to  start  Bishop's  College  at  Calcutta 

In  1 8 14  the  widespread  distress  extending  over  the 
portions  of  Germany  which  Napoleon's  conquests 
had  devastated  aroused  the  charity  of  England.  We 
read  nowadays  with  interest  Lives  of  Napoleon  and 
admire  the  greatness  of  the  man  ;  the  misery  he  spread 
is  not  so  present  to  us.  In  Dantzic  1761  buildings 
were  left  demolished,  4420  damaged,  and  a  great 
number  of  the  inhabitants  lost  their  all.  An  orphan 
house  was  set  up  at  Pirna  "  in  the  midst  of  nearly 
fifty  miles  of  totally  destroyed  villages  and  towns." 

Manners  Sutton  was  largely  concerned  with  stimu- 
lating and  giving  effect  to  the  charity  of  England.  A 
fund  was  raised  as  usual  in  the  City  of  London.  But 
this  was  not  enough.  Watson  was  jealous  of  the 
honour  of  the  Church,  and,  appealed  to  by  him,  Manners 
Sutton  started  a  subscription  which  was  liberally 
responded  to,  the  archbishop's  only  condition  being 
that  Watson  should  manage  the  details.  The  favourite 
form  in  those  days  of  a  charitable  appeal  to  Churchmen 
— a  King's  letter  read  in  the  churches — produced  a 
large  collection.  Parliament  granted  100,000,  and 
showed  on  what  good  terms  Ministers  were  with  the 
Primate  by  making  the  100,000  payable  to  the  arch- 
bishop. Manners  Sutton — wise  man  as  he  was — 
trembled  at  becoming  a  public  accountant  ;  and  it 
was  only  reliance  on  Watson's  skill  in  finance  and  the 
excellent  arrangements  ^  he  made  with  the  Bank  of 
England  that  prevented  Manners  Sutton  from  declining 
the  trust.  Prussia  got  about  ;<;8ooo,  Silesia  £11,500, 
Saxony  ;£2 1,009,  Hanover  2,200,  from  the  Parlia- 
mentary Grant.    When  the  fund  closed  in  1 816,  Watson 

'  Churton,  181.  ^  Churton,  152. 

27 


4o8         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


got  a  unanimous  vote  of  thanks  for  his  services  as 
secretary,  accompanied  by  a  personal  letter  from  the 
archbishop,  in  which  he  spoke  of  "the  many  personal 
obligations  "  he  owed  to  Watson,  "  for  the  assistance 
he  had  unremittingly  afforded  "  him  "  in  the  whole 
of  this  business." 

The  years  181 7  and  181 8  saw  a  great  impetus  to  the 
work  of  church  building .  Sutton  as  Primate  took  a  fitting 
part  in  the  movement.  But  the  driving  force  came 
from  laymen  like  Joshua  Watson  and  clerics  like  Van 
Mildert  and  Archdeacon  Daubeny,who  seems  to  have 
been  the  first  man  to  insist  on  a  new  church,  in  the 
building  of  which  he  was  interested,  containing  free 
seats. 

No  doubt  things  had  got  pretty  bad  as  regards 
church  accommodation.  Without  the  consent  of  the 
parson  of  the  parish  it  was  an  ecclesiastical  crime  to 
build  a  church,  and  the  parson  did  not  always  want 
another  built  or  his  parish  subdivided.  According  to 
Mr.  Hore,  only  twenty-four  churches  were  built  or 
rebuilt  in  England  and  Wales  between  1800  and  1807, 
though  new  populations  were  springing  up  everywhere 
and  old  ones  trebling  their  numbers.  In  the  first 
twenty  years  of  the  century  there  were  only  ninety-six. 
In  the  following  ten  years  the  number  went  up  to  three 
hundred  and  eight. 

An  important  factor  was  the  starting  of  the  In- 
corporated Church  Building  Society.  Its  first  name 
was  the  Church  Room  or  Free  Church  Society,  and 
Joshua  Watson  notes  in  his  diary,  under  date  4th  July 
1 81 7,  that  he  was  appointed  to  prepare  an  address  to 
the  public  to  precede  rules,  etc.  Watson  duly  drafted 
rules  with  the  aid  of  Archdeacon  Daubeny.  On 
1 8th  February  181 8  a  large  and  influential  meeting  of 
the  supporters  of  the  new  Society  was  held,  over  which 
Manners  Sutton  presided,  and  at  which  he  delivered 
what  the  Gentleman's  Magazine  calls  "  a  luminous  and 
energetic  address."    Christ  Church,  Oxford,  contributed 


1 82  8] 


NEW  CHURCHES 


ijiooo/  and  Daubeny,  with  scruples  that  it  were  not 
anonymous,  £500  to  the  Society.  Wordsworth,  brother 
of  the  poet,  had  just  been  brought  back  by  the  arch- 
bishop to  his  side,  having  been  appointed  to  the  Rectory 
of  Lambeth.^  He  set  on  foot  the  building  of  four  new 
•churches  in  his  parish. 

Meanwhile  the  Government  were  prepared  to  co- 
operate in  providing  church  accommodation.  Lord 
Liverpool,  the  Prime  Minister,  was  on  excellent  terms 
with  the  archbishop,  who  had  the  cause  at  heart.  In 
Anne's  time  Parliament  had  provided  for  the  building 
of  fifty  churches  in  and  near  London,  and  had  devoted 
the  coal  duties  to  the  purpose,  but  not  one-quarter 
of  the  fifty  had  ever  been  built.  The  number  is  given 
at  nine  or  eleven.^  The  Royal  Speech  at  the  opening 
of  the  Session  in  181 8  had  invited  attention  to  the 
deficiency,  and  in  March  the  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer brought  the  matter  before  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. In  his  speech  he  said  London  had  a  population 
of  1,129,451,  but  the  church  and  episcopal  chapels 
could  scarcely  contain  more  than  the  odd  numbers. 
The  clerg}'-  of  the  sparse  churches  that  existed  were 
overworked.  One  curate,  so  the  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer  said,  affirmed  that  on  a  recent  Sunday  on 
which  he  had  taken  a  friend's  duty,  he  had  performed 
two  morning  services  and  one  evening  service,  having 
assistance  only  for  one  sermon.  He  had  married  so 
many  couples  that  he  had  forgotten  the  precise  number  ; 
he  had  read  the  Churching  of  Women  twice  ;  he  had 
christened  seventeen  children  and  had  read  the  Burial 
Service  five  times  over  seven  bodies — a  separate  funeral 
having  been  found  impossible.  The  Chancellor  pro- 
posed to  raise  000,000  by  the  issue  of  Exchequer 
Bills,  and  to  vest  the  administration  of  the  fund  in 
Commissioners . 

The  measure  passed  the  Commons  without  dissent  ; 
and  on  21st  March,  Lord  Liverpool  writes  to  Lord 

*  Churton,  i.  201.  *  Perry,  iii.  175,  *  Hore,  i.  240. 


4IO         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


Harrowby,  a  keen  Churchman  and  supporter  of  the 
measure,  urging  that  the  matter  should  be  pressed 
forward.  "  I  have  written  to  this  effect,"  he  says,  "  to 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  He  is  to  have  a 
meeting  of  the  bishops  on  the  subject  on  Easter  Tues- 
day." Lord  Liverpool  moved  the  second  reading  of 
the  Bill  himself  in  an  elaborate  speech  in  which  he 
stated  that  the  Church  ought  to  provide  accommodation 
for  one  in  three  of  the  population.  With  the  sub- 
scriptions the  grant  would  evoke  it  was  hoped  to  build 
150  to  200  churches.  Marylebone  was  to  have  5, 
Pancras  4,  Shoreditch  4,  Bethnal  Green  4,  Lambeth  3, 
Manchester  7, Sheffield  4,  Stockport  3, Birmingham  3  or  4. 

Sutton  spoke  in  support  of  the  measure  and  con- 
gratulated the  Lords  on  it  passing  practically  un- 
opposed. In  Committee  there  was  a  little  breeze  over 
the  architecture  of  the  proposed  churches,  but  in  the 
end  Whigs  and  Tories  agreed  that  though  accommoda- 
tion was  to  be  the  first  point,  they  would  not  neglect, 
as  the  archbishop  put  it,  an  adherence  to  that  mode  of 
buildings  which  characterised  the  reformed  Church  of 
England  from  churches  where  that  reform  was  carried 
too  far.  In  the  course  of  his  speech  he  said  that  he 
held  in  his  hand  a  letter  from  Perceval,  written  a  few 
days  before  his  assassination,  stating  that  he  hoped 
shortly  to  furnish  the  archbishop  with  full  details 
required  of  the  scheme  for  providing  new  churches.^ 

The  Bill  as  it  passed  into  law  became  the  Act  58 
Geo.  III.  cap.  45.  It  was  strictly  a  Church  Building 
Bill.  The  commissioners  it  appointed  were  to  examine 
parishes  and  have  regard  to  the  amount  .of  population,, 
and  the  disproportion  between  the  number  of  in- 
habitants and  the  present  church  accommodation. 
Some  of  its  provisions  sound  strange  to  our  ears.  By 
the  Statute,  in  the  churches  to  be  built  under  it,  part 
was  directed — not  empowered — to  be  "  arranged  in 
pews  to  be  disposed  of  or  let  under  the  Act,  and  part 

1  Parliamentary  Reports,  818,  ii.  719. 


i828]  CHURCH  BUILDING  ACT  411 


not  so  arranged  to  be  free  seats."  Manners  Sutton  and 
his  coadjutors  believed  in  the  potency  of  preaching. 
Where  there  was  an  excessive  population  the  Act, 
sec.  85,  provided  for  a  third  service  being  either 
morning  or  evening  service  with  a  sermon  as  the 
bishop  should  direct.  Section  75  showed  that  the 
framers  of  the  Act  had  in  mind  the  Scriptural 
injunctions  with  reference  to  a  clergj'^man's  "  own 
house."  It  enacted  that  there  should  be  a  "  seat  or 
pew  sufficient  to  hold  six  persons  contiguous  or  near 
to  the  pulpit  for  the  use  of  the  minister  and  his  family  "  ; 
also  "  seats  not  less  than  four — not  among  the  free 
seats — for  the  use  of  the  minister's  servants."  Perhaps 
nowadays  such  points  would  be  left  to  the  church- 
wardens for  the  time  being  ;  but  they  are  a  picture  of 
the  feelings  of  the  leading  Churchmen  of  the  day. 

Some  anxiety  was  felt  whom  the  Government  would 
appoint  as  commissioners.  Manners  Sutton  had  no 
doubt  a  powerful  voice  in  selecting  them,  and  foremost 
among  his  lay  advisers  was  Joshua  Watson.  Arch- 
deacon Cambridge,  a  bosom  friend  of  Watson's  and 
joint-treasurer  with  him  of  the  newly-formed  National 
Society,  and  Archdeacon  Pott,  as  well  as  Watson 
himself,  and  Dr.  Wordsworth,  afterwards  Master  of 
Trinity,  figure  in  the  first  list. 

They  had  an  office  in  Great  George  Street,  West- 
minster, but  their  preliminary  meetings  were  held  at 
Lambeth  Palace  under  Manners  Sutton's  immediate 
supervision,  and  we  get  the  names  of  the  commissioners 
in  a  letter  from  Pott  to  Watson  under  date  ist  August,^ 
remonstrating  with  Watson  for  his  non-attendance. 

"  What  happened  yesterday  to  deprive  us  of  your 
aid  at  Lambeth  ?  I  need  not  say  how  much  we  missed 
you.  The  Commission  Committee  met  at  Lambeth  as 
was  determined — Lord  Grenville,  the  Speaker ,Wollaston, 
Wordsworth,  Mant,  and  myself,  and  alas  !  an  empty 
chair  for  J.  W." 

*  Churton,  i.  200. 


412 


CHARLES  MANNERS*SUTTON  [1805- 


The  Speaker  was  Addington. 

Manners  Sutton  seems  to  have  been  especially- 
careful  in  the  selection  of  his  chaplains.  Van  Mildert 
was  for  many  years  one  ;  later  the  archiepiscopal 
chaplains  included  Lonsdale,  a  foremost  Churchman  of 
the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  preacher  of 
Lincoln's  Inn,  and  later  Bishop  of  Lichfield.  Richard 
Mant,  afterwards  a  bishop,  named  in  Pott's  letter,, 
and  George  D'Oyley,  afterwards  rector  of  Lambeth 
and  biographer  of  Seeker,  were  now  two  of  the 
chaplains.  Mant  was  author  of  a  famous  com- 
mentary, and  was  especially  trusted  by  Manners  Sutton. 
The  S.P.C.K.  about  1815  projected  a  Family  Bible.  It 
was  originally  to  be  double-barrelled — one  for  students^ 
one  for  cottage  readers  ;  and  the  notes  were  to  be 
from  the  fathers  or  acknowledged  Church  of  England 
divines.  There  was  a  little  uneasiness  that  by  these 
rules  the  scope  of  divines  quoted  would  be  too  narrow.* 
Manners  Sutton  altered  the  plan  of  the  designers  of 
the  work  and  entrusted  the  preparation  of  the  com- 
mentary to  Mant  or  D'O^de^^ 

The  first  church  completed  by  the  aid  of  the  com- 
missioners under  the  Act  was  that  of  Bitton  in  Gloucester- 
shire. The  then  Bishop  of  Gloucester  was  Henry 
Ryder,  a  friend  of  Simeon  of  Cambridge  and  a  man 
of  great  piety He  had  been  a  supporter  of  the 
building  of  the  new  church.  In  a  letter  to  Watson,, 
dated  1 7th  September  1 82 1 ,  he  describes  the  new  church 
and  its  consecration  ceremony  : 

"  In  spite  of  one  or  two  slight  defects  in  archi- 
tectural taste  it  is  a  fair  Gothic  structure.  In  situation 
'  set  upon  a  hill,'  indeed  observed  and  admired  by  the 
people  for  several  miles  round." 

Of  the  consecration  he  says  : 

"  From  1500  to  1600  crowded  the  area,  which^ 
however,  will  contain  from  1000  to  1200  persons,  1 

*  Churton,  12O.  ^  Churton,  230. 


1828] 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC  RELIEF 


413 


understand,  conveniently.  Many  of  the  Dissenters  and 
some  of  the  wildest  practical  infidels  of  the  neighbour- 
hood were  present.  Great  decorum,  attention,  and  some 
degree  of  apparently  deep  interest  were  observable  in 
the  congregation.  I  preached  upon  the  text,  '  Where 
two  or  three,  etc'  " 

The  bishop  goes  on  to  tell  of  a  "  Lancastrian 
school  near,  the  pupils  of  which,  it  is  hoped,  may 
attend  church.    "  The  Wesleyan  chief,"  he  says,  "  has, 
I  understand,  shown  a  very  favourable  disposition." 

Sutton  is  found  in  1819  speaking  on  the  Catholic 
question,  which  then  absorbed  so  much  public  interest. 
In  June  Lord  Grey  proposed  to  relieve  candidates  for 
office  and  for  Parliament  from  making  the  Declarations 
against  Transubstantiation  and  Invocation  of  Saints 
as  idolatrous  and  superstitious.  His  argument  was  : 
"  You  exclude  Roman  Catholics  from  the  franchise 
because  their  religion  requires  them  to  give  allegiance 
to  a  foreign  potentate,  the  Pope.  The  doctrines 
abused  by  the  Declaration  have  nothing  to  do  with 
foreign  allegiance.  Why  require  persons  to  declare 
things  which  they  imperfectly  understand  as  idolatrous 
and  superstitious  ?  Good  Churchmen,  such  as  Arch- 
bishops Herring  and  Sheldon  had  held  transubstantia- 
tion to  be  false  but  not  idolatrous."  Lord  Grey  was 
seconded  by  the  Bishop  of  Norwich  in  a  speech  of 
great  power. 

The  archbishop,  as  we  might  expect,  was  against 
giving  the  Romans  any  rope.  "  In  this  dangerous  age 
of  experiments,"  said  he,  "  when  so  many  innovations 
had  been  made — when  in  a  neighbouring  country 
morality,  social  order,  and  good  government  had  been 
overthrown,  and  even  Christianity  annihilated  " — 
(what  a  Godsend  to  speakers  on  the  Conservative  side 
was  the  French  Revolution  for  fifty  years  !) — "  should 
this  nation  in  the  pursuit  of  a  political  experiment  throw 
away  the  blessings  of  a  constitution  which  had  saved 
us  from  so  many  perils."    Majority  against  the  Bill,  59. 


414  CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


George  iii.  died  on  the  29th  January  1820,  and  the 
Regent  became  King.  The  unhappy  position  of  things 
between  him  and  his  wife  caused  urgent  and  serious 
questions  at  once  to  arise  as  to  the  status  and  rights 
of  the  latter  lady.  It  is  not  strange  that  the  chief 
officer  of  the  Church  of  England  found  himself  involved 
to  some  extent  in  the  handling  and  solution  of  these 
questions. 

We  may  remind  our  readers  that  George  iv.'s 
first  days  as  King  were  marked  by  his  own  severe 
illness, — it  is  believed  that  he  would  have  died  within 
forty-eight  hours  of  his  father  had  not  Sir  Matthew 
Tierney  bled  him  almost  to  death, — and  the  Cato 
Street  Conspiracy  under  Thistlewood  for  the  en  tnasse 
assassination  of  the  Cabinet  attracted  attention,  but 
subject  to  this  the  case  of  the  Queen  became  the 
absorbing  topic  of  attention  for  Ministers  and  for  the 
public. 

We  may  also  remind  our  readers  that  Caroline, 
then  Princess  Royal,  had  left  England  in  1814  ;  that 
she  had  since  lived  abroad  in  Italy  and  on  the 
Mediterranean  under  circumstances  which  gave  rise 
to  suspicion  ;  that  in  1819  George  iv.,  then  Prince 
Regent,  who  wanted  to  marry  again,  communicated 
with  the  Ministers  as  to  a  divorce,  and  that  the  Queen's 
friends  and  advisers  in  this  country,  particularly  Lord 
Brougham,  then  Mr.  Brougham,  were  at  first  disposed 
to  agree  to  a  separation. 

On  George  iii.'s  death,  Caroline  apparently  de- 
termined to  return  to  England,  and  in  spite  of 
Brougham's  persuasion  to  the  contrary,  given  when 
he  met  her  at  St.  Omer,  she  arrived  in  London  in 
June. 

The  first  point  that  arose  was,  how  was  Caroline, 
now  Queen,  to  be  dealt  with  in  the  Prayer  Book  ?  The 
King  insisted  on  her  name  being  omitted,  and  Lord 
Liverpool  and  his  Cabinet,  with  the  exception  of  Canning, 
agreed.    The  King,  incensed  at  the  Queen's  coming  to 


QUEEN  CAROLINE 


415 


England,  where  she  was  received  with  enthusiasm  by 
the  crowd,  sent  down  to  Parhament  documents  affect- 
ing the  Queen's  conduct  abroad  —  and  Liverpool 
proposed  that  these  should  be  referred  to  a  Secret 
Committee. 

The  Queen  and  her  supporters  objected  to  this 
Committee  as  consisting  of  persons  who  had  already- 
made  up  their  minds  adversely  to  the  Queen.  Lord 
Liverpool  had  proposed  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
to  be  on  the  Secret  Committee.  Lord  Dacre,  who 
presented  the  Queen's  petition  against  the  Committee 
to  the  Lords,  objected  on  the  ground  that  the  Primate 
would  not  have  suffered  the  name  of  the  Queen  to  be 
•excluded  from  the  Liturgy — as  it  had  been  by  Order 
in  Council — without  having  formed  impressions  un- 
favourable to  her. 

Manners  Sutton  showed  weakness  ;  he  took  up 
the  position  that  he  was  not  the  responsible  adviser 
of  the  Crown  in  the  alteration  of  the  Liturgy.  The 
alteration  had  been  made  on  the  advice  of  Ministers 
in  Council,  and  the  archbishop  merely  executed  the 
Orders  in  Council  ;  he  was  willing  to  go  off  the 
•Committee  if  satisfactory  grounds  were  shown  which 
did  not  impeach  his  public  or  private  honour. 

The  Secret  Committee  met  and  reported,  and  its 
report,  as  is  well  known,  produced  the  Bill  of  Pains 
and  Penalties  against  the  Queen,  which  proposed  to 
deprive  her  of  her  status  as  Queen,  and  to  dissolve 
and  annul  the  marriage  between  her  and  His 
Majesty. 

We  do  not  propose  to  repeat  the  long  but  interesting 
story  of  the  Queen's  trial.  The  Bill  was  carried  on 
its  second  reading  by  123  to  95,  but  on  the  third 
reading  by  108  only  against  99,  and  was  then  dropped. 
As  is  known,  the  unfortunate  Caroline  was  refused 
admission  to  Westminster  Abbey  on  the  Coronation, 
fell  sick,  and  died.  As  to  the  Bill,  the  second  reading 
was  opposed  by  the  Archbishop  of  York,  but  supported 


4i6  CHARLES  xMANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


by  the  Primate  and  ten  bishops.  In  Committee  a  very- 
serious  question  arose  as  to  the  clause  dissolving  the 
marriage,  or,  as  it  was  called,  the  divorce  clause.  The 
earlier  clause  deprived  Caroline  of  the  status  and  rights 
of  Queen  Consort.  In  Committee  the  Archbishop  of 
York  moved  the  omission  of  the  divorce  clause.  Bloom- 
field  of  Chester  said  he  thought  the  crime  of  adultery  had 
been  proved  against  her,  and  so  had  voted  for  the  second 
reading,  but  he  did  so  on  an  understanding  that  the 
divorce  clause  was  to  be  laid  aside.  Sutton's  view 
was  that  divorces  a  vinculo  were  declared  to  be 
lawful  by  our  Saviour  Himself.  The  words  "  for 
any  other  cause "  than  adultery  made  divorces  for 
adultery  allowable.  Being  convinced  the  charge  of 
adultery  was  proved,  he  had  no  objection,  least  of  all 
of  a  religious  nature,  to  the  clause.  The  clause  was 
carried  by  129  to  62.  But  the  minority  included  two 
archbishops, one  of  Tuam,  and  eight  bishops.  In  February 
1821  an  annuity  of  ;(]50,ooo  was  voted  by  Parliament  to 
the  unfortunate  Caroline.  Lord  Darnley,  one  of  her  sup- 
porters, took  the  opportunity  of  asking  that  her  name 
might  be  restored  to  the  Prayer  Book.  The  archbishop's 
short  speech  against  the  proposal  is  as  reported  one  of 
the  weakest  and  most  inconsequent  that  he  made  in 
Parliament.  He  laboured  the  point  that  the  matter 
was  wholly  unconnected  with  religious  principle.  It  was 
a  claim  not  for  prayer  but  for  distinction  in  prayer,, 
and  was  therefore  a  matter  not  of  religion  but  of  grace 
and  favour.  Caroline  would  come  in  under  the  prayers 
for  the  Royal  Family,  and  if  not,  would  have  the  benefit 
of  the  prayers  of  the  Church  for  the  human  race 
generally.  It  is  of  interest  to  note  that  on  investigation 
it  was  found  that  on  the  point  of  mentioning  Royal- 
Consorts  in  public  prayer  the  practice  of  the  English 
Church  had  not  been  uniform.  Some  had  been 
mentioned,  some  not. 

Of  the  whole  question  of  George  iv.  and  his  wife, 
the  populace  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  centurjr 


1828] 


REGINALD  HEBER 


417 


took  the  side  of  the  Queen  on  the  broad  ground  that 
as  a  husband  he  was  certainly  to  blame  whether 
she  as  a  wife  was  or  not.  The  upper  classes  mostly- 
thought  the  King  was  the  King,  and  could  do  no 
wrong  ;  perhaps  our  archbishop's  views  were  tinged, 
too  much  tinged,  as  those  of  his  class.  One  hundred 
years  later,  had  the  case  arisen  then,  the  view  of 
the  populace  of  1820  would  have  gained  more  general 
support. 

The  good  work  of  Bishop  Middleton  at  Calcutta  was 
cut  short  by  his  death  after  a  short  but  severe  illness  in 
July  1822.  His  successor  was  the  brilliant  Reginald 
Heber,  author  of  "  Palestine,"  the  best  of  Oxford  prize 
poems,  and  of  the  hymn  "  From  Greenland's  Icy  Moun- 
tains." Perhaps  the  Hackney  Phalanx  had  misgivings 
whether  he  were  not  too  many-sided  and  too  little  clerical ; 
his  Life  of  Jeremy  Taylor  had  deficiencies,  and  on  his  way 
up  to  Bengal  he  wanted  to  shoot  a  tiger.  But  the  doubts 
were  of  a  very  few  only.  Heber  was  consecrated  by 
Manners  Sutton  on  Sunday,  ist  June.  The  archbishop 
seems  to  have  felt  a  timidity  about  the  Bishop  of  Calcutta, 
afraid  perhaps  that  either  by  Evangelical  Churchmen  or 
by  Nonconformists  the  maintenance  of  such  a  post  would 
be  looked  upon  with  suspicion  or  distrust.  Nine  years 
before,  when  the  first  Bishop  of  Calcutta  had  been  conse- 
crated by  him,  he  had  deprecated,  if  not  forbidden,  the 
publication  of  the  consecration  sermon  preached  by 
Dr.  Rennell.  Now  Heber  is  consecrated  in  the  presence 
of  a  handful  of  persons  in  Lambeth  Chapel.  Heber  him- 
self notes  in  a  letter  that  the  archbishop  kindly  invited  his 
brother  and  Mrs.  Manners  Sutton,  his  daughter  Emily 
with  two  friends.  "  The  archbishop,"  says  Heber  in  the 
same  letter,  "  read  the  service  beautifully,  and  I  was  much 
affected."  1 

Manners  Sutton  presided  also  at  Heber 's  "  send  off  " 
meeting  in  the  old  S.P.C.K.  offices  in  Bartlett's  Buildings, 
and  gave  a  "  grave  and  dignified "  address.  Heber 

*  Life  of  Heber,  133. 


4i8  CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


replied  with  eloquence  and  earnestness.  The  meeting 
was  impressive.   Watson  vsTote  of  it : 

"  It  was  indeed  a  grand  day,  and  every  one  seemed 
■dehghted  with  it  ;  none  more  so  than  the  archbishop,  who 
told  me  a  day  or  two  afterwards  with  his  usual  emphasis 
that  it  was  perfect." 

Van  Mildert  says  of  the  same  occasion  :  "  I  know  not 
when  I  had  so  exquisite  a  treat.  It  was  everything  that 
the  purest  taste  and  the  most  unaffected  piety  could 
desire." 

In  1823  and  1824  the  everlasting  question  of  marriage 
and  the  solemnisation  of  marriage  was  before  Parlia- 
ment, and  we  find  Sutton  introducmg  a  Marriage  Act 
Amendment  Bill.  One  of  the  matters  dealt  with  was 
the  annulment  within  a  year  of  improper  marriages  of 
minors.  The  problem  was  how  to  deal  with  the  case  of 
a  minor  marrying  without  the  consent  of  parents  or 
guardians.  There  were,  said  the  archbishop,  three 
courses  : 

(1)  To  make  the  consent  of   parent   or  guardian 

unnecessary. 

(2)  To  leave  the  marriage  without  consent  dissoluble 

at  any  time. 

(3)  To  make  the  marriage  voidable  by  the  parents 

for  a  year. 

The  last  course,  though  not  altogether  without  ob- 
jection, was  what  the  archbishop  recommended.  The 
Bill  got  a  second  reading,  though  opposed  by  the  advo- 
cates of  indissoluble  marriage. 

Later  in  the  year  Lord  Lansdowne  moved  a  Bill  to 
enable  Dissenters  to  be  married  in  their  own  chapels,  or 
alternatively  to  have  the  Anglican  service  mangled  by 
the  omission  of  certain  words.  Sutton  spoke  and  opposed 
any  alteration  in  the  Prayer  Book,  and  the  Bill  dropped . 

The  next  year  saw  the  introduction  by  the  same  peer  of 
a  Bill  granting  relief  to  the  Unitarians  in  enabling  them  to 


1 828]  HELP  TO  WATSON  419 

be  married  in  their  own  chapels,  or  with  the  invocation  of 
the  Trinity  in  the  Church  service  omitted .  He  was  rebuked 
by  the  Lord  Chancellor  Eldon,  and  his  views  seem  not  to 
have  suited  the  young  Bishop  of  Chester,  Bloomfield, 
who  thought  the  Unitarians  undeserving  of  any  concession . 
Even  as  far  back  as  1825,  Bloomfield 's  great  abilities  seem 
to  have  made  their  mark  in  Parliament.  The  Bill  was 
lost,  as  was  another  Bill  for  a  somewhat  similar  purpose,  in 
the  following  year — which  was  supported  by  the  Primate, 
and  opposed  by  Bishop  Bloomfield. 

By  this  time  the  agitation  on  the  Catholic  Enfranchise- 
ment claims  was  at  its  height.  As  they  have  often  done 
since,  the  clergy  got  up  petitions  against  the  Bill.  History 
repeats  itself,  and  Eldon  having  presented  a  petition 
against  the  claims  from  the  congregation  of  Percy  Street 
Chapel,  Lord  King  told  the  House  the  minister  had 
before  the  conclusion  of  the  service  informed  the  congre- 
gation that  a  petition  was  lying  in  the  vestry  for  signature, 
and  as  the  House  of  Lords  was  influenced  by  numbers, 
he  recommended  all  the  females  to  sign  it.  The  learned 
and  pious  Howley,  Bishop  of  London,  vindicated  the 
clergyman  and  said  he  had  not  introduced  any  political 
discussion  into  the  pulpit.  But  the  Primate  mightily 
disapproved  of  his  conduct  as  both  irregular  and  improper. 

The  archbishop  was  now  an  old  man,  having  covered 
the  Psalmist's  threescore  years  and  ten.  For  the  last  three 
years  of  his  life,  from  1825  to  his  death  in  1828,  he  was 
unable  to  attend  the  House  of  Lords.  In  1825,  when  his 
health  was  infirm,  he  had  the  chance  of  repaying  the 
debt  of  service  he  owed  to  Joshua  Watson.  Sutton  had 
amassed  a  large  fortune,  as  was  then  the  fashion  of  arch- 
bishops ;  and,  whatever  defects  or  even  faults  he  had, 
niggardliness  was  not  one  of  them.  1825  saw  a  great 
commercial  crisis,  and  poor  Watson  was  hard  hit,  though 
his  own  losses  were  not  like  those  of  some  of  his  con- 
nections, ruinous.  His  church  and  charity  funds  were 
fortunately  intact,  "  in  safe  keeping,"  says  his  biographer, 
"  elsewhere,"  and  he  was  helped  at  a  time  of  pressure  by 


420         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


being  repaid  a  large  sum  which  he  had  some  years  before 
lent  a  friend  for  a  benevolent  object.  A  few  days  before 
Christmas  1825,  Watson  got  a  note  from  Lambeth  Palace  : 

"  My  DEAR  Sir, — ^When  you  called  upon  me  a  week  or 
ten  days  ago,  I  was  not  well  enough  to  see  you.  I  am  now 
most  anxious  to  have  five  minutes'  conversation  with 
you.  Spare  me  if  you  can  five  minutes  to-morrow 
morning  between  the  hours  of  10  and  12.  From,  my  dear 
Sir,  your  faithful  and  obliged  friend  and  servant, 

"  C.  Cantuar."! 

Watson  went  and  made  notes  of  the  interview. 
There  was  emotion  on  both  sides.  Sutton  began  by 
apologising  for  not  coming  to  Watson  :  his  doctors  would 
keep  him  at  home  ;  then  with  "  a  faltering  voice  and 
suffused  eyes "  he  expressed  his  deep  sympathy  with 
Watson's  trouble  and  offered  help — ^which  meant  financial 
or  other  help.  "  These  are  not  words  of  course,"  said  the 
Primate,  "  I  speak  from  my  soul ;  and  upon  every  public 
and  private  ground  of  personal  respect  I  say  it  would  be  the 
highest  gratification  to  me  to  come  forward  in  any  way 
that  can  be  of  use."  Watson  disclaimed  meriting  such  kind- 
ness by  anything  he  had  done.  "  Not  so,"  said  the  arch- 
bishop. "  I  have  long  been  under  great  obligations  to 
you.  .  .  .  They  are  obligations  of  many  years."  Watson 
was  able  to  decline  the  prof  erred  help,  which  seemed 
almost,  says  his  biographer,  "  to  disappoint  the  kindly 
Primate."  "  Well,"  he  said,  "  perhaps  not  now  ;  but  it 
may  be  otherwise ....  I  have  never  felt  more  strongly  in 
my  life."  The  day  before  the  interview  he  had  asked  the 
advice  of  Mr.  Justice  Allan  Park  as  to  what  he  should  do. 
"  Judge,"  said  he,  "  I  can  tell  you,  I  could  not  love  that 
man  more  were  he  my  own  son." 

The  archbishop's  death,  however,  at  the  age  of 
seventy-three  came  rather  unexpectedly.  He  was 
buried  in  a  vault  under  Addington  Church.  It  is  signi- 
ficant of  the  change  in  our  ideas  of  burial,  that  of  the 

1  Churton,  Life  of  Watson,  250. 


3828]       MANNERS  SUTTON'S  FAMILY  421 


five  archbishops  buried  at  Addington  the  first  two  are 
buried  inside  the  church  and  three  in  the  churchyard. 

The  funeral  procession  from  Lambeth  Palace  was  of 
an  ornate  and  imposing  kind,  with  the  usual  number 
•of  porters  and  mutes  then  employed  in  private  funerals. 
It  is  of  interest  that  the  first  part  of  the  Burial  Service 
was  read  by  John  Lonsdale,  afterwards  Preacher  of 
Lincoln's  Inn  and  Bishop  of  Lichfield. 

Manners  Sutton  died  a  rich  man.  He  was  bold 
•enough  to  write  his  will  in  his  own  hand — providing 
fairly  for  his  family  and  making  his  son,  the  Speaker, 
executor.  The  latter,  it  is  said,  bought  a  house  for  his 
mother  and  sisters  in  Gloucester  Place. 

The  archbishop's  eldest  son  Charles,  like  the  sons  of 
several  archbishops  of  the  time,  was  called  to  the  Bar, 
where  he  made  for  himself  a  good  position,  being 
Treasurer  of  his  Inn,  Lincoln's  Inn,  in  1825.  He  entered 
Parliament  as  member  for  Scarborough  in  1806,  and 
here  he  also  attained  distinction.  He  was  afterwards 
member  for  Cambridge  University.  He  was  judge 
advocate-general,  and  was  elected  Speaker  in  June  1817. 

In  1835  he  was  created  Viscount  Canterbury.  It 
was  a  remarkable  fact  that  for  several  years  the  brother 
of  the  Primate  was  Lord  Chancellor  of  Ireland,  and  his 
son  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons.  The  arch- 
bishop's eldest  daughter  Mary  married  the  Hon.  Hugh 
Percy,  Bishop  of  Carlisle  ;  another  daughter  married 
the  Rev.  James  Croft,  who  became  Archdeacon  of  Canter- 
bury. 

The  fashion  of  the  day  to  eulogise  almost  without  dis- 
crimination a  deceased  prelate  or  statesman  renders  it 
difficult  to  gauge  exactly  Sutton's  merits  or  demerits  as 
Primate.  On  the  whole,  a  careful  examination  of  his 
interpositions  in  Parliament  while  archbishop,  extending 
over  twenty  years,  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  though 
mistaken  in  his  principles,  as  for  instance  on  his  attitude 
towards  relief  of  the  Roman  Catholics,  he  acted  with 
dignity  and  propriety  in  the  House  of  Lords.    He  was 


422         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


more  jealous  than  a  Primate  would  nowadays  care  to  be 
in  protecting  the  rights  of  the  clergy  to  their  tempor- 
alities, e.g.  when  he  brought  in  a  Bill  to  aid  clergymen 
in  getting  effective  dispensations  for  holding  two  bene- 
fices beyond  the  prescribed  limit,  and  in  his  treatment  of 
non-resident  rectors  or  vicars  ;  but  on  such  questions 
as  divorce  he  took  a  high  and  worthy  line. 

His  biographer  in  the  Gentleman's  Magazine  says  that 
in  saying  that  his  Grace  passed  through  life  with  the 
character  of  a  most  accomplished  gentleman,  let  it  be 
understood  that  he  was  a  Christian  gentleman.  Later 
on  he  adds  naively,  "  Fortune  as  well  as  merit,  it  is 
said,  is  necessary  to  make  a  great  man."  Birth  was  the 
fortune  or  casualty  which  brought  about  his  advance- 
ment ;  the  merit  was  of  no  peculiar  or  remarkable 
character,  but  there  was  no  deficiency,  and  none  of  those 
eccentricities  or  originalities  by  which  great  genius  is 
often  debased  or  deformed.  His  expenses  were  splendid 
and  liberal  ;  his  personal  habits  temperate  and  ab- 
stemious. 

We  must  remember  that  for  twenty  years  after  the 
French  Revolution  it  would  have  been  impossible  for 
the  head  of  the  English  Church  to  be  anything  but  con- 
servative in  religion  and  in  politics.  To  any  suggestion 
of  reform  nine  out  of  ten  educated  Englishmen  only 
waved  their  hands  in  the  direction  of  France — "  Our 
King  still  has  his  head  on  and  his  crown  upon  it." 
Later,  "  Who  else  but  England  has  stemmed  the  tide 
of  Napoleonic  conquest?"  "How  have  we  done  it? 
Our  constitution  has  done  it.  Even  if  it  has  defects,, 
be  careful  before  you  change  it  in  any  particular." 

With  reasoning  on  these  lines  Manners  Sutton  would 
in  the  main  have  agreed.  But  there  are  points  in  his 
favour  to  be  noted.  The  Government  of  the  day  listened 
to  and  trusted  him  :  his  chaplains  and  most  if  not  all 
of  those  he  preferred,  such  conspicuously  as  Words- 
worth, were  the  best  men  in  the  Church.  He  was  dis- 
cerning of  ability  and  merit  ;  from  some  letters  written 


HIS  CHARACTER 


423 


to  the  S.P.C.K.  about  its  publications  he  saw  the  stuff 
of  which  Hugh  James  Rose  was  made,  and  brought  him 
forward.  When  Watson's  biographer — no  mean  judge 
— is  commenting  on  the  fact  of  the  archbishop  and 
bishops  having,  at  first,  the  right  reserved  to  them  of 
appointing  the  committee  of  the  newly-formed  National 
Societ}^,  he  attributes  it  "  to  the  personal  dignity  and 
authority  "  of  Manners  Sutton.  The  same  author 
testifies  to  his  rule  over  his  suffragans,  saying,  "  Seldom 
has  any  Primate  presided  over  the  English  Church 
whose  personal  dignity  •  of  character  commanded  so 
much  deference  from  his  suffragans  or  whose  position 
was  so  much  strengthened  by  their  concordant  support. 
The  fact  is  certain  and  the  cause  deserves  to  be  more 
studied  than  it  has  been  by  some  writers  on  the  state 
of  Church  affairs  during  his  primacy."^ 

Joshua  Watson  had  a  high  opinion  of  his  private 
and  public  character  and  of  the  wisdom  of  his  adminis- 
tration. This  surely  counts  for  a  good  deal.  Writing 
to  the  archbishop's  son  after  his  death  to  request  half 
a  dozen  casts  of  the  bust  Chantry  had  just  finished  of  the 
late  Primate,  he  speaks  of  "  the  extraordinary  services 
which  the  late  archbishop  was  graciously  permitted  to 
render  to  the  Church  of  England  during  the  most  busy 
period  of  her  history  since  the  Reformation  .  .  .  the 
public  benefits  conferred  by  the  daily  sacrifice  of  private 
comfort  by  such  a  man  none  can  know  but  those  whose 
labours  were  animated  by  his  presence,  whilst  his 
judgment  directed  their  counsels  and  his  courtesy  won 
their  affections."  This  is  the  language  of  a  letter  to 
a  son  about  his  recently  deceased  father,  and  is  more 
stilted  than  we  should  use.  But  our  verdict  must  be 
that  Sutton,  looking  at  the  world  through  early  nine- 
teenth-century spectacles,  was  a  courteous,  benevolent 
Primate,  and  something  more.  His  son,  a  distinguished 
Speaker,  as  we  have  said,  in  his  reply  to  Watson  called 
his  father  "  one  of  the  best  of  men  and  one  of  the  most 
1  Churton,  260, 

38 


424         CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805- 


valuable  and  efficient  public  servants  that  ever  lived." 
That  is  probably  what  most  if  not  all  of  the  Public  Men 
of  his  day  would  have  said  of  the  archbishop. 

Though  no  eminence  as  a  Biblical  or  classical 
scholar  can  be  claimed  for  Manners  Sutton,  he  showed 
as  head  of  the  English  Church  a  fitting  interest  in  and 
disposition  to  assist  the  cause  of  Biblical  research.  It 
had  long  been  the  opinion  of  scholars  that  the  libraries 
at  Constantinople,  particularly^  those  of  the  Patriarch 
of  Jerusalem,  contained  MSS  of  parts  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment of  great  value.  The  libraries  of  the  convents  on 
Mount  Athos  were  supposed  to  be  similarly  rich.  Very 
early  in  the  nineteenth  century,  with  the  approval  and 
probably  at  the  expense  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury-, two  English  scholars  undertook  visits  of  research 
to  these  places .  The  leader  of  the  party  was  Professor 
CarMe,  a  good  Oriental  scholar  who  had  been  Pro- 
fessor of  Arabic  at  Cambridge,  and  was  afterwards 
Chancellor  of  Carlisle  and  held  the  valuable  living  of 
Newcastle.  He  died  at  the  comparatively  earh^  age  of 
forty-five.  His  companion  was  Dr.  Philip  Hunt.  In 
the  3^ears  1800  and  1801  these  gentlemen  visited  the 
libraries  of  the  convents  in  the  Islands  of  the  Sea  of 
Marmora,  the  libraries  of  the  Patriarch  of  Jerusalem  at 
Constantinople  and  of  St.  Saba  near  Jerusalem.  In 
some  cases  the  scholars  succeeded  in  cataloguing  the 
large  numbers  of  MSS  found.  From  St.  Saba  Professor 
Carlyle  got  from  the  Superior  leave  to  carry  off  six  of 
the  oldest  MSS — two  copies  of  the  Gospels,  one  of  the 
Epistles,  two  Books  of  Homilies  and  the  Sophist 
Libanius.  From  the  Patriarch's  Constantinople  Library 
he  similarly  secured  twenty-nine  MSS  of  the  Gospels 
and  Epistles,  and  three  classical  MSS. 

They  also  procured  from  the  libraries  of  the  Greek 
Monks  on  the  Prince's  Islands  in  the  Sea  of  Marmora 
copies  of  parts  of  the  New  Testament  of  the  eleventh, 
twelfth,  and  thirteenth  centuries,  which,  according  to 
Dr.  Hunt,  they  bought  from  the  monks.    The  docu- 


1828]     MSS  FROM  THE  MONASTERIES  425 


ments  of  the  patriarchs  were,  however,  handed  to  the 
English  travellers  for  purposes  of  collation  and  ex- 
amination in  London,  and  were  to  be  returned,  says 
Professor  Carlyle,  "  to  the  Patriarch  of  Jerusalem 
should  he  ever  demand  them."  Meanwhile  the  whole 
find  was  consigned  temporarily  at  least  to  the  Library 
at  Lambeth. 

In  a  year  or  two  the  scholarly  Carlyle  died  before 
he  could  carry  out  his  design  of  a  fresh  edition  of  the 
Greek  Testament  in  which  should  be  incorporated  the 
results  of  a  collation  of  the  newly  unearthed  Greek  MSS. 

In  1806  Mrs.  Carlyle,  the  sister  of  the  Professor, 
and  Dr.  Hunt  made  over  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury two  boxes  containing  what  the  two  scholars  had 
found  and  brought  away,  and  it  would  appear  that  in 
the  matter  of  what  is  called  by  the  lady  "  compensa- 
tion "  the  archbishop  showed  true  liberality. 

In  April  1 806  the  boxes  were  opened  and  the  contents 
examined  by  Dr.  Dampier,  Bishop  of  Rochester,  Dr. 
Charles  Burney,  and  Dr.  Todd,  head  of  the  Library  at 
Lambeth.  They  contained  thirty-seven  volumes — four 
were  marked  C  as  coming  from  Constantinople,  and 
were  noted  as  subject  to  return  ;  eighteen  marked  I, 
as  coming  from  the  Islands  ;  and  five  marked  S,  from 
Syria.  All  except  C  were  valued  by  the  bishop  and 
his  colleagues — and  the  price  so  ascertained  the  arch- 
bishop approved  and  paid  to  Mrs.  Carlyle. 

In  1812a  new  Catalogue  of  the  documents  at  Lambeth 
was  made  and  published  which  contained  all  the  Carlyle 
collection,  except  C. 

Alas  !  a  few  years  later  difficulty  arose  with  the 
Patriarch  of  Jerusalem.  It  can  be  easily  understood 
how  a  mistake  may  have  arisen  as  to  the  terms  on  which 
the  documents  had  been  suffered  to  come  to  England. 
C  admittedly  was  liable  to  return. 

In  1 816  a  formal  claim  was  made  on  Archbishop 
Manners  Sutton  for  the  return  not  only  of  the  four 
documents  in  C,  but  of  others  as  having  "  been  only 


426  CHARLES  MANNERS  SUTTON  [1805-28 


lent  to  Professor  Carlyle."  The  Patriarch  thus  claimed 
eleven  documents — two  copies  of  the  Gospels,  three  of 
the  Acts  and  Libanius  from  St.  Saba,  two  Gospels,  two 
Psalters,  and  Eutropius  from  Constantinople. 

Manners  Sutton  seems  to  have  behaved  very 
sensibly.  "  C,"  i.e.  three  Gospels  and  one  Acts,  were 
at  once  put  aside  to  be  returned  :  so  were  two  Psalters 
and  the  Libanius.  Mr.  Carlyle  had  the  Eutropius. 
This  left  one  Gospel  and  two  Acts  to  make  good  what 
was  reclaimed.  These  were  taken,  and  in  the  end  the 
whole  parcel  was  returned  to  the  Patriarch  through 
the  Foreign  Office  and  the  English  Ambassador  in 
Turkey.  The  archiepiscopal  liberality  apparently  made 
nothing  of  the  fact  that  part  of  what  he  had  paid  for  he 
could  not  keep. 


INDEX 


Actors  at  Canterbury,  76. 
Addington  bought,  389  ;  sold,  390. 
America,  bishops  for,  153,  205  ;  Seeker's 

support  of,  280 ;  opposition  to,  283  ; 

consecration  of,  361-7. 
Annet,  284. 

Arabic,  New  Testament  in,  loi. 
Ashton,  3. 

Atterbury,  11,  54;  in  the  tower: 
appeals  to  Wake  for  religious  privi- 
leges, 99 ;  his  trial,  100 ;  Potter's 
evidence,  141. 

Auckland,  first  Lord,  350. 

Austrian  Succession,  War  of,  152. 

Bangorian  Controversy,  the,  128-37. 
Barlow,  Bishop,  his  consecration,  85. 
Beaufoy,  Mr.,  360. 
Beauvoir,  78. 

Beggar  s  Opera  condemned,  169. 

Bell,  Dr.,  of  Madras,  399. 

Benson,  Dr.  George,  197. 

Benson,  Martin,  Bishop  of  Gloucester, 

253  ;  death,  27. 
Bentley,  47. 
Berkeley,  Bishop,  281. 
Black burne,    P'rancis,    199 ;  Hutton's 

patronage  of,  245,  248. 
Blackburne,  Lancelot,  archbishop,  48  ; 

visit  to  Hanover,  49. 
Blandford,  Lord,  Moore  tutor  to,  349. 
Blasphemy  and  profaneness,  Bill  against, 

70  ;  fails,  139. 
Bossuet,  5. 
Bray,  Dr.,  68,  280. 

Broad  Bottomed  Administration,  the, 
153- 

Buckden,  palace  at,  35. 
Burnet,  Bishop,  14. 

Butler,  Bishop  Joseph,  251  ;  rector  of 
Haughton,  255  ;  George  11.  promotes, 
199  ;  "buried  not  dead,"  257  ;  death, 
271. 

Cambridge,  election  of  high  steward, 
317- 

Canterbury,  no  archbishop's  house  at, 
285. 


Carlisle,  rebels  at,  40. 

Caroline,  Queen,  as  Princess  of  Wales, 

50  ;  her  illness  and  death,  149. 
Caroline,  Queen,  wife  of  George  iv., 

415. 
Carteret,  152. 

Catechism,  Wake's  lectures  on,  24 ; 

Seeker's  lectures  on,  261. 
Catholic  Emancipation,  376. 
Chandler,  Dr.  Samuel,  207. 
Chaslett,  master  of  University  College, 

13,  38- 
Choirs,  Seeker  on,  307. 
Church  Building  Society,  408;  Act,  411. 
Church  Government,  Potter's  work  on, 

119;  reprinted,  142. 
Clarke,  Dr.  Samuel,  256. 
Collier,  102. 

Commonitorium,  the,  80. 

Continent,  charity  for  the,  407. 

Convocation,  under  Wake,  52 ;  sus- 
pension of,  56  ;  Seeker  opposed  to 
summoning,  288. 

Cornwallis,  Frederick,  archbishop,  310  ; 
made  primate,  325.  , 

Cornwallis,  Bishop  James,  of  Licl)^eld, 
325- 

Cornwallis,  Marquis,  313. 

Courayer,  Wake's  friend,  87 ;  offers 

asylum  to,  92,  93,  95  ;  made  D.C.  L. 

at  Oxford,  96. 
Cowper,  Lord  Chancellor,  39,  54,  66. 
Croydon  old  Palace,  211  ;  Act  for  sale 

of,  345- 

Cumberland,  Duke  of.  Herring's  address 
to,  190. 

Czar  offers  to  the  Nonjurors,  105. 

Dawes,  Sir  William,  Archbishop  of 

York,  12,  65. 
Denne,  Dr.  Samuel,  344. 
Dettingen,  George  the  Second's  victory 

at,  152. 

Dilapidations  at  Lambeth  and  Croydon, 
39- 

Dissenters',  relief  of,  57,  337,  359,  402. 
Divorce,  remarriage  on,  395. 
Doddridge,  Dr,  Philip,  201,  305. 


428 


INDEX 


Dole,  archbishop's,  226. 

Ducarel,  librarian  at  Lambeth,  336. 

Duncombe,  William,  friend  of  Herring, 

168,  171. 
Du  Pin,  78. 

Eastern  Church,  Nonjurors'  negotiations 

with,  104. 
Eden,    Miss  Eleanor,   her  proposed 

marriage  to  Pitt,  375. 
Edward  the  Sixth's  first  Prayer  Book, 

103. 

Eldon,  John,  Lord,  380-1. 
Enthusiasm,  Archbishop  Manners  Sutton 

deprecates,  404. 
Etonian,     Cornwallis    first  Etonian 

primate,  326. 
Eucharistic  Sacrifice,  Wake's  view  of 

Church  of  England's  doctrine  on,  90. 
Evelyn,  John,  7. 

Fathers,  Apostolical,  Wake's  treatise 
on,  8. 

Feathers  Tavern  Petition,  327. 

Fell,  Dean  of  Christ  Church,  Bishop 

of  Oxford,  2,  4. 
Fox,  370. 

Frederick,  Prince  of  Wales,  father  of 

George  ill.,  258. 
Fytche  v.  Bishop  of  London,  357. 

Gallican  Church,  Wake's  negotiations 

with,  78. 
George  I.,  death  of,  145,  171. 
George  11.,  coronation  of,  145  ;  funeral, 

278. 

George  in.,  baptism  by  Seeker,  150; 

first  days  as  king,  277  ;  coronation, 

279  ;  illness,  371. 
George  I  v.  marries  Caroline,  374. 
Gibson,  Edmund,  Bishop  of  London, 

35>  38.  146. 
Gin  Act,  151. 

Girardin,  Abbe,  80  ;  visit  to  England 

by,  87. 
Gordon  Riots,  339. 
Grafton,  Duke  of,  322. 
Grey,  Dr.,  of  Hinton,  friend  of  Moore, 

348. 

Grey,  Lord,  413. 

Habeas  Corpus,  237. 

Hanoverian  Dynasty,  its  hold  on  the 
English  people,  154. 

Hardwicke,  Lord,  the  friend  of  Her- 
ring, 172,  217. 

Hare,  Bishop,  53. 

Hell-Fire  Club,  71. 

Herring,  Thomas,  archbishop,  167- 
229  ;    birth   and    education,    168 ; 


preacher  at  Lincoln's  Inn,  169  ;  atti- 
tude to  Latitudinarians,  176-8, 
208  ;  Archbishop  of  York,  18 1  ;  dis- 
taste for  the  Primacy,  194-5  !  illness, 
214,  223. 
Hickes,  102. 

Hoadly,  129  ;  his  Plain  Account,  175. 
Holidays  at  the  Custom  House,  393. 
Hollis,  Thomas,  284. 
Hough,  Bishop,  38. 
Huntingdon,  Selina,  Countess  of,  330. 
Hurd,  Richard,  Bishop  of  Worcester, 
351.  353- 

Hutlon,  Matthew,  archbishop,  230-47  ; 
patronised  by  Duke  of  Somerset, 
231  ;  Bishop  of  Bangor,  232  ;  Arch- 
bishop of  York,  233  ;  primate,  235  ; 
sudden  death,  239  ;  character,  241-3. 

Inglis,  Bishop  of  Nova  Scotia,  368. 

James,    Saint,   parish    of  Piccadilly, 

foundation  of,  10. 
Jews,  naturalisation  of,  204,  272. 
Johnson  of  King's  College,  New  York, 

278,  282,  299. 
Jones,  his  school  at  Tewkesbury,  249. 

Kennet,  Bishop  of  Peterborough,  66,  73- 
Kennicott  and  his  Hebrew  Testament, 
297. 

King,  William,  author  of  anecdotes, 
293- 

Lancaster,  Joseph,  400. 
Lardner,  Dr.  Nathaniel,  291. 
Law,  Bishop  Edmund,  176,  300,  313. 
Lay  Baptism,  Wake  on,  19. 
Library  at  Lambeth,  244,  279,  309. 
Lisbon,  earthquake  at,  222. 
Liverpool,  Lord,  402,  409,  410. 
Lonsdale,  Bishop,  421. 
Lort,  345. 

Lowth,  Bishop  of  London,  353-4. 
Lycophron,  Potter's  edition  of,  117. 

Macclesfield,  Earl  of,  his  trial,  106,  143. 

Majendie,  of  Hedingham,  213. 

Manchester,  Playhouse  at,  335. 

Manners  Sutton,  Charles,  archbishop, 
380-4  ;  favourite  of  George  ill.,  384. 

Manners  Sutton,  Charles,  son  of  the 
archbishop  ;  created  Viscount  Can- 
terbury, 421. 

Mant,  Richard,  412. 

Manuscripts  from  the  East,  425. 

Markham,  Archbishop  of  York,  333, 
367,  382. 

Marlborough,  Duke  of,  patron  of 
Moore,  349,  351. 


INDEX 


429 


Marlborough,  Sarah,  Duchess  of,  265. 
Marriage  Act  Amendment,  418. 
Marsh,  Bishop  of  Peterborough,  400. 
Marske,  239. 

Masquerades,  107,  223,  287. 
Mayhew,  283. 

Middleton, first  Bishop  of  Calcutta,  404. 

Moore,  John,  archbishop,  348-79  ; 
Bishop  of  Bangor,  351  ;  stirs  up 
George  III.  against  Catholic  Eman- 
cipation, 376 ;  his  wealth  and 
nepotism,  378. 

Nag's  Head,  the,  consecration  at,  85. 
Navy  Bill,  237. 

New  churches,  scheme  to  build,  50,  67. 
Newcastle,  Duke  of,  prime  minister, 

315;  dispenser  of  patronage,  200; 

return  to  office  as  Privy  Seal,  288. 
Newcastle,    the  present  Duke  saves 

Croydon  Palace,  347. 
Newdigate,  Sir  Roger,  328. 
Newton,  Bishop,  279,  286,  301,  322, 

323>  343- 

Nicholson,  William,  Bishop  of  Carlisle, 
40,  44. 

Nithsdale,  Lady,  letter  to  Wake,  43. 
Nonconformists,  comprehension  of,  209. 
Nonjurors,   102  ;   their   doctrinal  dis- 
sensions, 103. 
Non-resident  clergy,  403. 
Norris,  Henry  Handley,  398. 
North,  Lord,  355. 
Nottingham,  Lord,  71. 

Occasional  conformity,  59,  62. 
Options,  161. 

Parker,  Archbishop,  entertains  Thirlby 
and  Tunstall  at  Lambeth,  343. 

Parliamentary  Reports,  Seeker's  early 
efforts  in,  263. 

Parliamentary  speakers,  bishops  as,  264. 

Park,  Mr.  Justice  Allan,  398,  420. 

Peers,  not  Law  Lords,  speak  and  vote 
on  causes,  335. 

Pelhams,  the,  192,  2l6. 

Philadelphia  Convention,  362,  364. 

Pitt,  William,  the  elder,  coalition  with 
Newcastle,  274  ;  Seeker's  suspicions 
of,  289  ;  on  relief  to  Dissenters,  360. 

Pitt,  William,  the  younger,  proposed 
marriage  of,  375  ;  quarrel  with 
George  III.  over  appointment  of 
archbishop,  388. 

Porteous,  Bishop  Beilby,  292,  336. 

Pott,  Archdeacon,  411. 

Potter,  John,  archbishop,  1 1 5-66; 
birth  and  education,  115;  Regius 
Professor,  120 ;  Bishop  of  Oxford, 


124  ;  friendship  with  Wake,  126  ; 

suggested  as  Dean  of  Christ  Church, 

137;  alleged  haughtiness,   157;  his 

wealth,  158. 
Potter,  Thomas,  159. 
Preaching,  Seeker  on,  308. 
Preston,  Lord  Viscount,  3. 
Pretyman,  Bishop,  385. 
Private  baptisms,  307. 
Protestant  interest,  Bill  to  strengthen, 

61,  64. 

Provoost,  Bishop  of  Philadelphia,  367. 

Quakers,   petition  of  clergy  against 

relief  to,  97. 
Quarrel    between     George    I.  and 

George  II.,  when  Prince  of  Wales,  50. 

Rebellion,  Mar's,  of  17 15,  40,  45. 
Rebellion  of  1745,   154  ;  Archbishop 

Herring's  vigorous  action  in  relation, 

183-9  ;  Seeker's  activity  over,  266. 
"  Religious  Societies,"  the,  21. 
Resignation  bonds,  357. 
Reynolds,   Sir  Joshua,    proposes  to 

decorate  St.  Paul's,  334. 
Richardson,  Mr.  Justice,  401. 
Richardson  v.  Chapman,  16 1-6. 
Roman  Catholics,  relief  to,  372,  392, 

413- 

Romilly,  Sir  Samuel,  391. 
Rose,  John,  son  of  Bishop  of  Edin- 
burgh, a  rebel,  45. 
"  Routs  "  at  Lambeth,  331. 
Ryder,  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  412. 

Sacheverell,  impeachment  of,  26-33. 
St.  Paul's  Cathedral,  building  of,  35. 
St.    Paul's,    Deanery   of,  Cornwallis' 

angry  letter  on  receiving,  321. 
Sancroft,  Archbishop,  31. 
Sandwich,  Earl  of,  317. 
Scottish  bishops,  the,  267. 
Seeker,    Thomas,    archbishop,  248- 

309  ;   schoolfellow  of  Butler,  249  ; 

medical  studies  in  Paris,  251  ;  marries 

the  sister  of  Martin  Benson,  256  ; 

Bishop  of  Oxford,  263  ;  Dean  of  St. 

Paul's,  269 ;  primate,  275 ;  illness 

and  death,  290-1  ;  a  hard  worker,  300. 
Sherlock,  Bishop  of  Salisbury,   148  ; 

of  London,  200. 
Sidmouth,  Lord,  395. 
Slave  Trade,  the,  369. 
Smalridge,  42,  51  ;  his  uncompromising 

Toryism,  122  ;  death,  137. 
Society  for  the   Propagation   of  the 

Gospel  in   Foreign   Parts,  Wake's 

interest  in.  III  ;  activity  of,  405. 
Squire,  Bishop,  227. 


430 


INDEX 


Stair,  Lord,  82. 

Stanhope,  48. 

Stamp  Act,  repeal  of,  289. 

Strype,  Wake's  estimate  of,  89. 

Sunderland,  62,  73. 

Tait,  Archbishop,  390. 

Talbot,  Edward,  252-3. 

Talbot,  William,  Bishop  of  Salisbury, 

124  ;  then  of  Durham,  252. 
Temple,  Archbishop,  390. 
Tenison,  Archbishop,  7,  13,  23. 
Terrick,  Bishop  of  London,  323,  334- 

335- 

Test  and  Corporation  Acts,  repeal  of, 

5S,  332,  359.  370. 
Thicknesse,  Miss,  34S. 
Thirlby,  Bishop,  342. 
Tithe  Commutation,   Pitt's  proposal 

for,  373. 
Tortoise  at  Lambeth,  203. 
Tranquebar  missionaries,  112. 
Trelawney,    Sir    John,    Bishop  of 

Winchester,  75. 
Trimnell,  Bishop,  61,  76. 
Turner,  Francis,  Bishop  of  Ely,  3. 

Visitation,  Wake's,  23. 

Wake,  William,   archbishop,  1-114; 
his  stay  in  Paris,  4 ;    his  papers, 


15  ;    liberality    at    Croydon  and 

Lambeth,  113. 
Wakefield,  Gilbert,  293. 
W^ale=;,  Herring's  visits  to,  180. 
Walpole,  Horace,  his  dislike  to  Seeker, 

259. 

Walpole,  Sir  Robert,  anger  with  Gibson 
over  Quakers'  Bill,  147 ;  Prime 
Minister,  172,  174. 

Warburton,  Bishop,  294. 

W^atson,  Bishop  of  Llandafl,  334,  341. 

Watson,  Joshua,  397,  411. 

Watts,  Dr.  Isaac,  303. 

"Week  end  "-ing,  beginning  of,  69. 

Wesley,  John  and  Charles,  their  inter- 
view with  Potter,  156;  Herring  on, 
219. 

Wesley,  Samuel,  15,  34. 
Whiston,  William,  77,  196. 
White,  Bishop  of  New  York,  367. 
Wilberforce,  William,  praise  of  Arch- 
bishop Moore,  369. 
Wilkes,  John,  318. 
Willis,  Dr.,  371. 

Wilson,  Bishop  of  Sodor  and  Man,  his 

appeal  to  the  Privy  Council,  109. 
Wollaston,  329. 

Wordsworth,  Rector  of  Lambeth,  405. 
Wren,  Sir  Christopher,  36. 

Yorke,  Charles,  288. 


Printed  by  Mofkjson  &  Gibb  Limited,  Edinturgh,  Scotland 


I 


